WCK Origin theories? [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

reneritchie

10-12-2003, 08:39 PM

I look at this issue a little differently. To me, the only reasonable way to handle this question is not who created WCK, and how do they link down to us, because this will *always* be a guessing game. Rather, I look at WCK, and see how far back we can take it.

With extent branches such as Yip Man (Chan Wah-Shun), Sum Nung (Yuen Kay-San, Fung Chun (Leung Jan), we can get a pretty good idea of what WCK looked like back to the late 1800s. If we add in Cho WCK, it fleshes this idea out.

Given the process of when branches diverge, and what they retain from that point on, we can get back to the Red Junk Opera, which is also what all known branches still extent in China record.

So that's our known history starting point, and everything before that is not known history, but something between historical conjecture and creation myth.

So, we begin with what do we know about the Red Junk? Scholars have researched both the Operas and the Societies that played a part in the Red Junk, and that can realistically set the stage for the place to which we can trace WCK, and can help immediately sort the 'less likely', from the 'more likely' (since it gives us a working timeline and historical setting).

Two articles may help at this point:

Opera (http://www.wingchunkuen.com/why/articles/contemporary/ritchie_opera.html)

Society (http://www.wingchunkuen.com/why/articles/contemporary/ritchie_societies.html)

But this doesn't (yet) help us know what kind of martial arts they trained on the red junk. Luckily, history can help again. We know the WCK people were part of the Red Turban Rebellion, and marched into Foshan under the leadership of one of the actors, Lee Man-Mao. And we know Lee Man-Mao's martial art--Fujian Weng Chun White Crane.

There is more, to be sure. Many in the rebellion were Hakka. Were the Hakka arts represented on the Red Junk? We know there were stories about 'Southern Shaolin', and that the Hakka liked to make up names like 'Southern Mantis' to cover themselves (and the Hakka history is fairly well mapped to 'Southern Shaolin' History, including helping the Qing against the Hokkien (as the 'Shaolin' helped them against the Xilu), then they were forced out, and they joined in rebellions against the Qing (like the origin myth of the Tian Di Hui).

As to Emei, I don't know yet. Hendrik has shown some remarkable evidence, including near complete matches between the WCK Kuen Kuit of the Cho family and the Kuen Kuit of the Emei 12 Posture, which weren't released until the 1970s, long after the Cho had them. Likewise, immigration patterns of the time (inlcuding those that led to the formation of the TDH) had people moving from Fujian, through the Liangguang, into Sichuan (where the 12 Postures of Emei come from), and back.

Hendrik feels certain some individual (known in legend as Miu Shun) travelled this route, learned both the Weng Chun White Crane and the Emei Twelve Postures, and mixed the shapes of WC with the power generation of 12P, and transmitted this system (known then simply as Siu Lien Tao) to the Red Junk.

I'm not so sure. Nothing has yet convinced me that the Siu Lien Tao predates the Red Junk, simply because martial arts spread, and WCK spread from the Red Junk. If it had been formed anywhere else, any time before, we should be able to find it spread from that place at an earlier time (much as we can find Fujian White Crane spread in Fujian before WCK).

If it does not predate the Red Junk, then we have highly accomplished martial artists and choreographers with all the raw material and the conditions (Red Turban Rebellion times) to warrant the development (continued over subsequent generations) of WCK.

Not the most romantic of theories, no secret monks or nuns, or ancient folk heroes, or anything, but IMHO, it's where we currently are (though it can, and of course will, be adjusted as new information, independantly verifiable, becomes available).

And I would vote for Peter Jackson directing anything at this point. Everyone else, especially that @#@#$ Lucas, has burned me far to often ;)

yuanfen

10-12-2003, 09:56 PM

Rene sez_

But this doesn't (yet) help us know what kind of martial arts they trained on the red junk.

((Absolutely. Different kinds of inferences))

Luckily, history can help again.

((Not much- more inferences. The problem with inferences without a clear cut verifiable/falsifiable theory is that different inferences can be drawn from the same "facts".))

Zhuge Liang

10-12-2003, 10:20 PM

Hi Rene,

Fascinating stuff. Thanks for the post.

Regards,
Alan

KPM

10-13-2003, 03:24 AM

Thanks Rene! That was helpful. But I would still like to see a summation or overview of Hendrick's origin theory with the various "evidences" he has uncovered......the pictures from the old white crane or emei book, the kuen kit you mentioned, the parallels where he found that Ng Mui may refer to a certain concept in white crane rather than a person, etc. Any chance that the two of you might work together to lay all of it out in an article for your website?

I agree with the idea of tracing a particular version back to where it split or diverged from the rest, and that it would spread from the time/area it was developed. But what do you think of the possibility of a version of WCK being the primary martial art of the secret societies prior to the Red Boat era, and therefore never "spreading" publicly? Do you think it is possible for a martial art particular to the secret societies that has been hidden from the public (but used to train an army to fight in rebellion against the Cheng) to remain hidden from and unseen by the public even after those societies have largely disbanded and the primary reason for secrecy (fall of the Ching dynasty) has ended?
Not meaning to step on any one "families" toes. Just trying to sort out the most likely/probable from the possibilities.

Keith

ZIM

10-13-2003, 06:44 AM

The Speaker implies while the Listener infers. Two possibilities for disconnect in meaning. The trick is to control what you can, which would be inference... unless writing history, in which you control for implications..

...hmm? ;) There is a point in there.

Phenix

10-13-2003, 08:16 AM

Thanks Rene,

i choose to post then singing karaoke. hahaha

a few points i like to add.

1, since we know how the inch jing evolution / development of the white crane from 1680's era to 1820. we can interpolate that slt must be developed before 1820. this is because if slt was develop after 1820. then, slt will adopted White crane's after 1820's jing type body structure.

2, before 1820, it seems that white crane mostly are some san sau. thus, it is not supprise that the white crane introduce to redboat by Lee Man Mau was this type of art.

However, on the other hand, Emei12p's structure is set based not san sau based.
thus, the development of slt as said in both yks and cho history that Miu sun develop SLT with white crane and his own art (12p) can be identify with the set based structure of 12p.

Furthermore, the cultivation of jing via using the yjkym and " softer" as we noticed in slt contrast to using of sanchin and "harder" of white crane. this point to the jing of development of slt is an adaption from 12p which is an intergation soft cultivation method.
and this relationship can be back up by yik kam's kuen kuit of slt as factual evident that in red boat time, at least yik kam train his slt jing with 12p method.

3, 12p is the link to buddhism awareness cultivation technics of SLT.
due to 12p itself was primarily invented as buddist cultivation to achieved 9 level of dyana with healt cultivation as the based of the dyana cultivation.... martial art application was a bi product. one can verify these from the kuen kuit of 12p today.
one can also check in the 12p kuenkuit to see how a set develop for real buddhist monks look like interm of cultivation and rules for holding precepts of buddism. by the way, 12p is based on esoteric buddism rather then Chan.

in addition, the buddist awareness cultivation technics of slt is a technics. it doesnt say convert to buddhism.

4, 12p comes with buddhism. the full teaching of 12p comes with a buddhist lineage.
as for slt, since it only used the buddhist awareness cultivation technics, it can or don't have to have the buddhist lineage.

5, Sun Tzu is un-deniable to be a core application philoshophy of wck.
the philosophy such as the snake which i post in other post,
the philosophy of lan sau, to using the enemy's weapon to seal against enermy......

Instead of Chan which say nothing about the applications characteristics of wck.

In addition, sun tzu was older then Chan in china.
and it is grear 2500 ago it is good today and the future.

Furtermore, the transmission of Chan needs lineage and mindseal. without this it doesnt support even the practice of chan. certainly, one can write about it or read about it even without lineage and teacher.... but that only limited to write and read about it only--- not knowing it.

6, as for the anti qing movements. the cho still preserve the saying and salutation of red boat /taiping revolution era.
one can see the salutation fit to fa dan's ( actor who playing actress ) motion and the saying does match into the CLF's way of saying or those slogang within dien chun tong of sang hai today.

7, there are writing record for the anti-qing movements. disregards of some think the high level anti-qing people doesnt write anything to not let the qing cacth them. The evidents are rest in ShangHai's Dien Chun Dang today. the letter from the Siau Dao hui and Taiping Was kept there for one to see.

8, CLF was among the number one martial art to train the anti-qing in canton. and was quest by anti qing, the founder train the trop. read the history of clf.
Thust, there is no reason to belive there is a special hidden sole poiertery martial art keep within anti-qing as top secret weapon. beside, real anti-qing martial artists in canton 1850's era has to in some way know /connect to the CLF people because they are the same "team".
In fujian, people of White crane did has record of involving with taiping to rage battle against Qing. and was give a prince title to the white crane practitioner by taiping's gorvement.

9, on the other hand, if there is a special hidden sole poiertery martial art keep within anti-qing as top secret weapon, then one should be able to brought up a full characterictics of this martial art in term of the ancient chinese way of chategolies a system.
, then, from that we can know which dynasty it was develop. what kind of special jing it was pioneer with. what kind of application phylosophy it based on. I am and i think we all always
has opening for differents but it has to come with evidents not just claim or a build up with modern day concept.

thus, today, we do have a cross fields, cross histories, cross phylosophies as bases of wck research. we have evidents andnot just make claim thus that is scientific.

this is a technical as technical post. hope that one doesnt take this post more then what it is.

as for a Whole view of how We have edivents to link. if one just look at the areas involve above. one can see it is a star wars type of work--- vast , and the link is complicated.
Can I handle these all myself ? the answer is no.

that is because, everyone from wck families has a piece
to contribute. Say Jim and I communicate and we find technics which similar for yik kam with koo lo. Rene and I communicate and I found out the how the "Ten fingers single heart " anti-qing code was impliment in YKS. Ken and I meet and I found Some Jing method from YM lineage which is significant for wck.....
thus, it is every wcners pice of art. certainly, not my alone.
no one in wck family should be exclude.
it is our's or everyone's wck. imho.

duende

10-13-2003, 08:59 AM

KPM,

Thanks for your compliments on "Mastering Kung Fu". I just got my own copy yesterday finally, and am just reading through it myself. Although, I had already been made aware of much of the historical knowledge in my training, it is a great pleasure to finally see my Sifu's knowledge combined with the VT museums historical reasearch in one fine book.

On a side note, obviously it appears the backlash has begun, considering what looks like traces of some deleted posts. That's probably for the best, however, I would think they would get booted from their membership entirely as I've witnessed others have in the past. But of course, if the source of these posts would have the courage to address their issues in a direct manner, then we wouldn't have these distractions at all.

Back to topic...

I too would like to see Hendriks research collectied and put into a cohesive book. I don't have a problem with what he says... just the way he says it. And unlike Rene here, I think Hendrik is very aware of all that he says, implys, and more importantly leaves out.... albeit his third, fourth or fifth language. I much prefer the manner and of Rene's post here, not to mention the fact the Rene is actually saying something here.

Rene,

have you read the "Mastering Kung Fu" book yet??? I'd be curious to hear your take on it. The gist of my problem with Hendrick's research, is that personally it doesn't relate to my Wing Chun experience at all. Many of the stated simularities that he finds in common with White Crane simply do not exist in my system. And many things that exist in my system, do not appear in other lineages either.

If you read the book, I think that regardless of what WC origin you ultimately choose, the awareness that you gain of my system's fundamental differences will help your understanding of my position immensely.

Back to work.... no holiday for me...

Alex

yuanfen

10-13-2003, 09:10 AM

Excerpt from Hendrik:
this is a technical as technical post. hope that one doesnt take this post more then what it is.

as for a Whole view of how We have edivents to link. if one just look at the areas involve above. one can see it is a star wars type of work--- vast , and the link is complicated.
Can I handle these all myself ? the answer is no.

that is because, everyone from wck families has a piece
to contribute.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Good technical post Hendrik-including pointing out
1.the need to distinguish between Chan and esoteric Buddhism.
2.the uniqueness of the emei postures
3, the contibutions but limitations of Fujian crane (re.inch power).

Rene reminded us of your earlier point on migration patterns from Fujian to Sichuan- an important communication link.
But, in the end you conformed for me - a basic methodological problem that makes tracing the history of wing chun immensely formidable....

The scattering and separate development of wing chun has resulted in very great diversities in styles and understandings.

The challenge of piecing together today- a cohesive conception of what is wing chun and then tracing it backward and seeing the accretions is an immense task requiring funding, time, cooperative sources- beyond just document review or solitary reflection. Then there is the problem- that lots of very good wing chun folks are not really curious about history- preferring to devote their energies to the preservation and further development of what has been directly transmitted to them..

So much of wing chun discussion is chip on the shoulder lineage driven and self serving. We can get some historical insights here and there-but IMO-- but we are pretty far from having a value free ideology free history of the art.

In the meantime- its possible to have a very good understanding of wing chun and help develop it and apply it without spending too much time on its history- Ip Man is a good example of that
kind of acheievement..

There is a veritable tower of babel on what is wing chun today-
on centerline theory, on weighting, how to do a wing chun punch,
position of feet, footwork, conceptions on nature and source of power, body angling, role of tension, chi gung, and so many other things.
Given the tower of babel analogy-there is the danger of basically tracing the history of pidgin english rather an understanding of language.

duende

10-13-2003, 09:14 AM

my post seems to have appeared twice...

sorry

ALex

Phenix

10-13-2003, 10:02 AM

Hi JOy,

When I present my data of evidents, I speak with confident, since those data exist.
However, as an individual of 21th century we all know having an open mind is a better attitude.

You have be in Univ research for long long time, As you sure know, There is no cloclusion can be drawn or completed if the issue or item is a alive and still continously growing, which is different from as it is going to the musium like the Apolo 11th, where the mission is completed and put aside.

in addition, the integration effort from everyone who contibute to WCK is very dynamic and a live. thus, it must be credited but cannot be drawn a line of completion since WCK is alive.

My view on these original stuffs are as the following:

1, different people can have different way of presenting thier history. and that is acceptable provided DO NOT FORCE others to agree one's view but be able to accept others.

One can present as much evidents so that others can make thier own conclusion, be it agree or dis agree. certainly people can raise question and doubt on the evidents and hopefully we all learn to be as in the university, cross examp the theory and data of evidents instead of get defensive.

2, the original theory and the information of the history of a lineage does influence or shape the outcome of the characteristics of thier practice.

Thus, the original theory and information is the seed of the karma to blossom the flower what one plants. and whatever flower seed one picked that shape the future or the fruit. he who believe is soft will have a characteristics of soft. He who believe in hard with have a characteristics of hard. He who believe in ShaoLin will have characteristics of Shao Lin. He who believe in Emei will have a characteristics of emei. Thus, for me it is not worthed to argue which original theory is correct... the result is in the characteristic of the pratice. The southern chinese eat rice and the northern eat noddle. so, there is nothing right or wrong they just as it is and the key is just to find out are they northern or southern or may be mix?

WCK is not an easy subject, however, the beauty of a democratic world is there is not only one voice but can be many voices and co exist.

Time to go to sleep. until see you again.

yuanfen

10-13-2003, 11:05 AM

Notes on and to Hendrik in brackets-

When I present my data of evidents, I speak with confident, since those data exist.

(( Hendrik-I have no doubts on that score. Sometimes the problem is that you have posted much over time...lots of net readers by the nature of the medium do not connect or sometimes even remember the details and the links of your
thesis over time.

Also true that when the contemporay events are controversial enough- history or the pursuit of history becomes more problematic.))))

in addition, the integration effort from everyone who contibute to WCK is very dynamic and a live. thus, it must be credited but cannot be drawn a line of completion since WCK is alive.

((True. But more to it---before credited- not always understood-
and reacted to in a knee jerk reflexive manner))

My view on these original stuffs are as the following:

((Agree with the rest. Listening isnt an easy art- in wing chun (ting jing?) or life. Also peole reify their habits based on their perception of their history. Thats really the important role of myths (mixes of fact and fancy)which pass as history. Most myths and histories have some facts attached to them- the issue of sufficiency is often bypassed. You take American history--- you can pick your thesis, myth or fancy...

1. America- a Christian Nation- the shining city on the hill- Puritans, Reagan, Limbaugh.
2. America founded by substantial property owners-Charles Beard.
3. America as Manifest Destiny (Jackson, Kipling etc)
4. Slavery as Evil(Abolitionists)
5. Slavery as relatively benign (Calhoun, revisionist historians- Time on the Cross)
6/. America asa Beacon of Freedom(Jefferson, Paine etc on the Bill of Rights, Hamilton on commerce). The Staute of Liberty with its
Lazarus poem as beacon to immigrants by passed the original idea to celebrate emancipation of blacks- would have been controversial.
7. America as illegal acquisition of tribal property (roger Williams, Deloria) hey it's Columbus day!
8. America as founded on myths that shouldnt be examined to closely. The holy of holies might be empty.(Daniel Boorstin)

There is even more to the cafetaria of US history alone.

All myth makers -historians, politicians. demagogues can cite "facts". Interesting reads. Lots of stories.

Dont misunderstand- I think that you have done some important work-get it into articles and books and movies(Roots).

joy

duende

10-13-2003, 11:13 AM

Hendrik,

just wanted to say that I acknowledge and appreciate the tone and core of your last post.

Thanks

Alex

PS Having a historian for a sister, has made very very aware of the problems that arise when one talks of history and the notion of historical fact.

In my mind, all research is good research. Unbiased research is of course the absolute ideal.

Train

10-13-2003, 11:06 PM

I totally agree with you Alex! :)

I heard there was a HFY seminar in Arizona. Did anyone from Sifu Fong's group show up? And congratulations on the book btw!

Peace!

KPM

10-14-2003, 03:07 AM

Originally posted by yuanfen
(( Hendrik-I have no doubts on that score. Sometimes the problem is that you have posted much over time...lots of net readers by the nature of the medium do not connect or sometimes even remember the details and the links of your
thesis over time.

That's what I was getting at in the beginning of this thread. :-) Hence my request for Hendrik (perhaps with some help) to write up his theory with the supporting evidence he has uncovered so far and put it up on a website for all to refer to. The essay can always be updated as new ideas and evidence emerges. But I for one do not have a good grasp of Hendrik's theory, and I am sure I am not the only one. I'd love to see something cohesive to refer to.

Keith

reneritchie

10-14-2003, 08:49 AM

Keith,

"Do you think it is possible for a martial art particular to the secret societies that has been hidden from the public (but used to train an army to fight in rebellion against the Cheng) to remain hidden from and unseen by the public even after those societies have largely disbanded and the primary reason for secrecy (fall of the Ching dynasty) has ended?"

Almost anything is possible. That being the case, all we can realistically do, as you say, is determine what is *more likely* as opposed to *less likely*.

If WCK was really an art trained by a large number of people in the secret societies (as opposed to a small fringe group on the Red Junks), then it likely would still have spread prior to and beyond the Red Junks within the Societies and today be found in Taiwan and overseas much as Hung fist and other Society arts are.

Look at one of the most popular WCK origin myths - that it was created to defeat the more common arts leaked to the Manchu so that soldiers could be trained better/faster and overthrow the Qing.

Yet they don't spread it, they don't train the militias, and they don't overthrow the Qing? Either that wasn't what WCK was created for, or the implementation was ineffective to the point of, well, not being the work of the brightest minds out there.

Again, IMHO, everyone can and will have theories, from Shaolin to Wudang, from English sailors bringing in western boxing to a little girl fighting off a bully, and that's great. The more theories, the more attention, the more discussion, but in terms of *HISTORY*, we only *KNOW* so much, and the rest, no matter how rational or romantic, is conjecture, and personally I like to keep my conjecture as grounded as possible.

We know the Red Junk had WCK aboard in the 1850s. We've thusfar not found WCK stemming from anywhere else, any earlier. It may have, maybe it even did, but there's nothing to indicate it yet, much less support it. We have a reasonably good idea what WCK looked like back to that point, what shapes it used and how it generated power (which are often considered the mapping points of an MA), and we know what other arts were around at that point in that area. Hopefully that will lead us someplace, and if its to where Hendrik or the VTM or someone else is pointing, fair enough, and if not, hopefully that will be just as acceptable to everyone who is interested not in a particular theory, but to the real origins of our art.

reneritchie

10-14-2003, 09:09 AM

Hi Alex,

"have you read the "Mastering Kung Fu" book yet???"

No, I checked my local bookstore and while they have "Jujitsu" and "Karate", no "Kung Fu" yet. If they don't get it soon, it will likely be part of my next Amazon order.

"I'd be curious to hear your take on it."

I'm also interested in hearing some opinions from non VTM folks as to how accesible it is to an external audience.

"The gist of my problem with Hendrick's research, is that personally it doesn't relate to my Wing Chun experience at all."

There are certain things that most modern WCK people are no longer very familiar with--some ways of doing things and some ways of calling things. When I met Hendrik for the first time, though his branch of WCK broke from mine in the late 1800s, those things remained, and while many at the LA Friendship Seminar stared on, we did old forms of Chi Sao, and referenced old terminologies no one else there had previously experienced.

The same thing happened when I met Jim Roselando of Gulao WCK, though our branches also split around the turn of the 20th century.

Yip Man's Foshan students, Leung Sheung lineage, and some others also retain some of these aspects (taken as a whole, they are probably all there just scattered more due to the larger spread and elaboration).

"Many of the stated simularities that he finds in common with White Crane simply do not exist in my system. "

I have a different problem, and its the same one I have with the VTM's Shaolin/Chan theory - I can't tell if its something that existed since inception, or something that came about later. Its a problem of time stamp. Hendrik is trying to nail that down by mapping out the development of certain important milestones in White Crane (if something similar was only developed later, it diminishes the possibility of earlier derivation).

What is also confusing is that he is breaking down the 'shape' and the 'power' to two different sources. WCK doesn't generate power the way most other martial arts that come from the same time and place generate power (eg. Hung Kuen), and any theory intent on discussing WCK origins has to address that. Hendrik is addressing it by saying the shape of White Crane (which is known to have been in the area) was combined with the power generation of 12 Postures, (which was foreign to the area).

This will require at least 2 areas of research:

1) Is the power generation really same/similar
2) How could a Sichuan system end up on the Red Junks? (which could possibly benefit from the knowledge of immigration patterns at the time, the same patterns that brought Fujian arts into the area).

"And many things that exist in my system, do not appear in other lineages either."

Over time, things tend towards distinction. And there are layers of similarity. If a small group train different arts, and a large group train the same art, the areas of similarity are different.

"If you read the book, I think that regardless of what WC origin you ultimately choose, the awareness that you gain of my system's fundamental differences will help your understanding of my position immensely."

So you train HFY? Okay, that gives me a better idea of what you mean above. Hopefully the book will as well.

But it begs the question--how different can something be and still be the same? Or, how similar does it have to be not to be different?

"Back to work.... no holiday for me..."

No Columbus Day? Don't worry, I'm sure some Canucks hoisted a drumstick or two in your honor.

Phenix

10-14-2003, 10:40 PM

Hi Rene,

Just get this and so exited to share with you.

A picture taken at 1860's.

this guy was the Manchu governor-general of Kwang- tung and Kwang -Xi at that time, the one you asked for and now heaven send him to me in my travel.

So our ancestors fight his armies? :D

John, if you drink my Vampire blood , I shall bring you across the time. I am in 1850's now. who do you want to meet?
Beware what you asked for. :D

Phenix

10-14-2003, 10:48 PM

What Style is this?

E12P.

Enjoy.

duende

10-14-2003, 11:39 PM

{There are certain things that most modern WCK people are no longer very familiar with--some ways of doing things and some ways of calling things. When I met Hendrik for the first time, though his branch of WCK broke from mine in the late 1800s, those things remained, and while many at the LA Friendship Seminar stared on, we did old forms of Chi Sao, and referenced old terminologies no one else there had previously experienced.

The same thing happened when I met Jim Roselando of Gulao WCK, though our branches also split around the turn of the 20th century.

Yip Man's Foshan students, Leung Sheung lineage, and some others also retain some of these aspects (taken as a whole, they are probably all there just scattered more due to the larger spread and elaboration).

I have a different problem, and its the same one I have with the VTM's Shaolin/Chan theory - I can't tell if its something that existed since inception, or something that came about later. Its a problem of time stamp. Hendrik is trying to nail that down by mapping out the development of certain important milestones in White Crane (if something similar was only developed later, it diminishes the possibility of earlier derivation).}

So let me get this straight... is this how you are trying to tell if your old forms of Chi Sau existed since inception???

{What is also confusing is that he is breaking down the 'shape' and the 'power' to two different sources. WCK doesn't generate power the way most other martial arts that come from the same time and place generate power (eg. Hung Kuen), and any theory intent on discussing WCK origins has to address that. Hendrik is addressing it by saying the shape of White Crane (which is known to have been in the area) was combined with the power generation of 12 Postures, (which was foreign to the area).

This will require at least 2 areas of research:

1) Is the power generation really same/similar
2) How could a Sichuan system end up on the Red Junks? (which could possibly benefit from the knowledge of immigration patterns at the time, the same patterns that brought Fujian arts into the area).}

You pose some very interesting questions! What I meant by there being things in HFY not in other systems and visa versa... really is in our structural theory and core chan philosophy. I know many people think that we are just throwing Chan into the mix. But once you actually get an understanding of the whole system and the way Chan philosophy is fundamental and so deeply embedded over and over again in micro and macro perspectives through out, I don't think anyone could deny that it really is Shaolin WC.

If you remove our physics-based structure and Chan learning methodology, there really is nothing left except a lot of kinda similar moves to other WC.

Personally, I'm finding learning about are differences kinda interesting. But then again, questioning everything is my nature.

I'll ask some people who know way more than me about the 2 questions you posed...

Alex

Damm Canucks... they don't know how good they got it, or do they??

reneritchie

10-15-2003, 08:23 AM

Keith,

My understanding of Hendrik's theory and its evolution is as follows:

In the 1970s, he inherited the Cho Kuen Kuet (handed down from opera performer Yik Kam to Cho Shun in the late 1800s) from Cho Hung-Choy, the only known person to have trained under both Cho Chuen in China and Cho On in Malaysia. Cho Hung-Choi was interested in the origins of WCK and had been researching them, and Hendrik began to help him. Since White Crane had migrated to Malaysia and to some extent been published, they were able to see certain connections to white crane in the Cho system (some of the core shapes and some of the stanza's of Kuen Kuit.)

(It should probably be noted that what the Cho's call Kuen Kuit are far beyond what most of us are used to--not just tactical or training idioms, the Cho Kuen Kuit are super detailed, step by step methodologies for the complete core sets of the system ("open your legs like this, breath like that, work this type of Ging, develop that kind of intent, etc. etc. etc).)

Then, one day, a book was published on an obscure and heretofor externally unknown system from the Golden Summit Temple of Emei, Sichuan Province, called the 12 Postures (Shi Er Zhuang/Sup Yee Jong). Hendrik or his sifu (I forget which) got a copy of the book, and was startled to see that it matched almost completely (a few differences in use of similar meaning but differently written characters here and there) those Cho Kuen Kuit that weren't white crane.

Since the Cho Kuen Kuit had not been released to anyone outside the Cho family (until Hendrik, I think), and the 12 Postures had not been released outside Emei until the author of the book went public, they were astounded. To them, the Cho Kuen Kuit matched their Siu Lien Tao and they couldn't imagine it matching another system.

Cho Hung-Choy passed away, but Hendrik continued his work. He sought out as much as he could on the 12 Postures, and studied it, and he saw that the Kuen Kuit matched the 12 Postures as exactly as they matched the Siu Lien Tao. The methodology was the same, only the shapes differed--Siu Lien Tao's shapes were more like White Crane.

Now, Cho family, like Sum Nung and some other branches, has an origin myth that states, in part, Buddhist Nun Ng Mui founded the White Crane system in Fujian, then left to travel the South. During her travels, she met a monk named Miu Shun to whom she taught White Crane. Miu Shun, already the master of his own (unanmed) system, mixed his art with White Crane, and taught it to Yim Yee.

Hendrik saw in this an allegory for the shape of White Crane to be mixed with the method of another system, and in the parallel with Cho Kuen Kuit, he saw this other system to be 12 Postures.

(It should be noted at this point that Hendrik is a religious Buddhist. He's not someone who does MA as a hobby who's recently began looking into Buddhism for MA reasons--It's his religion. This will, in part, explain his reaction to certain theories--he takes offense to them the way, perhaps, a Catholic who has studied with the cardinals would to someone who said WCK was founded as a direct expression of the holy scriptures (but not turning the other cheek). He may well be wrong, and they may well be right, but its religion, and *his* religion, so his reaction to those kinds of ideas is, if not appreciated by all, certainly understandable).

Over time, since he is Chinese and literate in Chinese (I'm not sure any of the others whose theories we are here discussing are, FWIW, myself included, though many of us have a smattering of knowledge on written Chinese, and some are striving very hard to learn), he continued to research the related histories of the opera and the societies from Chinese, Taiwanese, Hong Kong, and South East Asian sources, using his business trips to China to aid in 'hands on', research.

This is what led him to sharing articles like this one on the potential 'Shanghai Connection' (http://www.wingchunkuen.com/why/articles/contemporary/santo_shanghai.html)

And to historical references that indicate things like Saam Pai Fut might not refer to Buddha, but to the Red Turban take over of FUTshan, and Kim Yeung not to a horse stance, but to the attempted seige of YEUNG city of Guangzhou. (Maybe right, maybe wrong, but bold nonetheless, and offered with some measure of support in Red Turban slogans).

Most of the recent stuff I'll assume you've seen on the board. I'm not Hendik, nor are his theories mine, but I do appreciate and respect his work, and believe it benefits all of us, as it raises questions and prompts discussion, and sets the bar higher than it might otherwise be.

reneritchie

10-15-2003, 08:26 AM

Alex,

Sorry, I didn't mean WRT the Chi Sao, but to Hendrik's White Crane and 12 Posture theory. Like the VTM's Buddhism theory, while I can see what he means when he talks of the connection, I don't yet see a timestamp that proves WC and 12P were there from the beginning, and not just something that overwhelmed it since that time. (As I said though, he's made real progress by continually limiting the time frame via mapping the evolution of WC and the spread of 12P).

duende

10-15-2003, 09:11 AM

Rene,

I certainly DO NOT claim to be any authority on Chan Buddism, but I don't understand why Hendrik would take such offense at our system???

We have some very seriously practicing Buddists in our school, and all of them think that it's really cool that there is such strong parallels in our WC training and their religious practice. One of our students is evan an ex- Buddist nun who lived in a convent for twenty years. I would think he would actually be MORE interested in our system.

And.... most of the students in my Kwoon are Chinese, a good many of them born there with families still there, and they all are fluent in the language.

Anyways, just thought I'd share this with you... in hope of us all getting along better.

Alex

reneritchie

10-15-2003, 09:23 AM

Hi Alex,

I don't believe he takes offense at your system at all, just at claims that any martial art originated as an expression of Chan. Hendrick studied directly under a student of Xu Yun, under a classmate of Deng Hai, and takes it, and Shaolin, fairly seriously. And I'm not saying whether he's right or wrong to do so, just explaining that he's rather religious and as we know, when religion is involved, things can become very sensitive for some (like my analogy of a Catholic).

And by your Kwoon, do you mean you are in SF with Gee sifu? That's not what/who I was referring to. (More to those, past and present, actively involved in the online debate).

BTW- How did your 'he' end up in a convent? Was that a mistype or a very interesting story??

duende

10-15-2003, 09:46 AM

Rene,

the student I was referring to is a woman. The 'he' I was referring to was Hendrik. I should have made that more clear.

And yes, I am a student directly under Sifu Gee at the SF kwoon.

We recently had a seminar in AZ, where Sifu explained in much more detail the relationship HFY has with Chan Buddism. I wish you could have been there, as I would not want to speak for Sifu.

regards,

Alex

yuanfen

10-15-2003, 10:27 AM

John W sez:

BTW, I know Columbus discovered America in 1492, but who discovered Canada?

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Now now John- that is bad history. New orld tribals discovered Columbus and some of them paid with their lives as a result.

Columbus did not discover Amarica nor did vasco da Gama discover India. My wife's folks and mine were around long long before that.

On Canada. Ojibway, Crees, and others roamed there too- the Inuits came in much later but long before the Europeans.

Recently, the Interior minister for Ontario denied an investigatio because he was too busy campaigning.... some time ago a police sniper picked off and shot an Indian who was protesting a land issue.

There are indeed different "his-tories".

hunt1

10-15-2003, 10:55 AM

Alex- I wish to thank you. Just read the last several posts in this thread. You have given me more information about HFY than all the other posts in all the other threads. Keep up the good posts.

yuanfen

10-15-2003, 11:25 AM

Alex sez-
I certainly DO NOT claim to be any authority on Chan Buddism, but I don't understand why Hendrik would take such offense at our system???
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Because- there are many different kinds of "buddhism". But strictly speaking pure Chan has disciplined methods of transmission- the fighting arts is not one of them.

Individual buddhists can do all sorts of things under the umbrella of buddhism and subjectively rationalize them.

Neither Chan epistemology, nor the Chan sutras advocate the development of martial arts let alone a specific martial art.

Monks on travels carried staves- being generally fit some could fend off an unexpected attack by man or beast.

The first Chan patriarch in China was the Boddhidharma. In his famous transmitted sermon- "Outline of Practice"- it is said:

"Many roads lead to the Path, but basically there are only two:reason and practice. To enter by reason means to realize the essence through instruction and to believe that all living things share the same true nature, which isn't apparent because it's shrouded by sensation and delusion...

To enter by practice refers to four all inclusive practices: suffering injustice, adapting to conditions, seeking nothing, and practicing the Dharma.""
---------------------------------------------------------
Hendrik IMO has correctly pointed out other buddhist and non buddhist influences in early wing chun.

The richness of buddhism can be used for various utilitarian reasons and intentions- the samurai sword and killing, warrior "monks", attacking the Qing, betraying the Ming, falun gong, sokkagokai, touring shaolin monks
marketing , wealth, cultism, militarism, patriotism. shorinji kempo among other activities.

joy

yuanfen

10-15-2003, 01:19 PM

Great job Rene in highlighting Hendrik's origin thesis, Hendrik is doing an amazing and dedicated job in pursuing his origin thesis.
But much remains. Some thoughts-

I have no problem with different bio-mechanical approaches to kung fu- or interesting myths and lineage histories. Having said that --- I think that there is much to be done for Hendrik's thesis to become anywhere near a complete history of wing chun- beyond the Cho lineage. I have no problem in seeing some common features between what Hendrik does and Ip Man wing chun as I understand it. But there are differences that could be attributed to the long standing separate paths.

Chi sao, tan sao, footwork issues come to mind. These might be developmental differences due to the separate paths.
However lurking in mind honestly are the pics that I saw of Wang Kew Kit(sp?) supposedly a Cho practitioner...he was doing lots of things (leaning, weighting, karate like moves) that seem very far removed from wing chun.

I have no problem with the Ng Mui myth- myths are informative
concentrated capsules on how people think or thought. And I can see Ng Mui evolving and ergo in the development different names emrging for "styles" with commom features.

Fujian is a ways from Sichuan and the likely reason or pattern of migration could be more fleshed out- however speculatively in order to buttress the
crane-emei 12 synthesis becoming clearer.

Passing thoughts on a complex puzzle.

joy

Phenix

10-18-2003, 11:52 PM

Hi Rene, Joy, JOhn,

After the Sun Tzu qoute, I qoute Shurangama sutra with specifics.

A----------------------------------------------

Philosophy :

Example:

29. The skillful tactician may be likened to the
shuai-jan. Now the shuai-jan is a snake that is found
in the ChUng mountains. Strike at its head, and you
will be attacked by its tail; strike at its tail, and you
will be attacked by its head; strike at its middle,
and you will be attacked by head and tail both. ---Sun Tzu.

implementation :

Example:

"Gum Tau Gutt Mai" (he presses your head you lift your tail) "Gum Chong Gan Bil/Pil Bong Folk" (press the center shoot out bong or folk (compare this to the sun tzu qout above)

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Technology : Chi Sau, Sensing, Awareness.

Let See what we have in Shurangama Sutra....

B------------------------------------------------------

The Shurangama Sutra
----- Twenty -five Means to Enlightenment.

Sutra:

We first heard the dharma and left the home-life under
King of Awesome Sound Buddha. Once, when it was time for
the Sangha to bathe, I followed the custom and entered the
bathhouse. Suddenly I awakened to the fact that water does not
wash away the dust, nor does it cleanse the body. At that point,
between the two, I became peaceful, and I attained the state of
there being nothing at all.

To this day, I have never forgotten that past experience.
Having left home with the Buddha, I have gone beyond study.
That Buddha named me Bhadrapala. Wonderful touch was
revealed, and I accomplished the position of the Buddha¡¦s
disciple.

The Buddha asks about perfect penetration. As I have been
certified to it, touch is the superior means.

Sutra:

When I first left home to follow the Buddha and enter the
way, I often heard the Thus Come One explain that there is
nothing in this world that brings happiness. Once, when I was
begging in the city, I was reflecting on this Dharma-door and
did not notice a poisonous thorn on the road until it had *****ed
my foot. My entire body experienced physical pain, but my
mind also had an awareness: though it was aware of strong pain
and recognized the feeling of pain, I knew that in my pure
heart, there was neither pain nor awareness of pain.

I also thought, ¡¥Is it possible for one body to have two
awarenesses?¡¦ Having reflected on this for a while, my body
and mind were suddenly empty. After twenty-one days, my
outflows disappeared. I accomplished Arhatship and received
certification in person and a confirmation that I had realized
the level beyond study.

The Buddha asks about perfect penetration. As I have been
certified to it, purifying the awareness and forgetting the body
is the superior method.

-------------------------------------

Thus, Technically, I don't believe in generazation of Damo's Chan or Northern or Southern Shao Lin CHAN which "mention something but has no specific at all. "
Specific can be found.
We know where the "Technology" comes from. IMHO.
Get a copy of Shurangama Sutra. IT is worthed if one is interested in those cultivation "Technology."

These all are not LanKa or Diamond Sutra "based. "
Thus, Can't just link this to DAMO's CHAN.

Remember my analogy of directly halt the operating system or Loading and un loading the interface of Computer?

I understood and respect how some likes to or believe thier base system is from Chan. And that is great.
Just suggest that one has to go through the related sutras and get a real Buddhist monk sifu. Bottom line, Chan/ Esoteric Buddhism is not a book reading subject. It needs transmission.... Just Can't learn it from reading.

Anything which makes WCK and the WCner better and more advance is great . So, for some may be instead of view me as always attacking, when I did pure technical discussion. why not view me as pointing a direction for everyone to be better?

yuanfen

10-19-2003, 08:18 AM

Notes on Hendrik's post (still in China?):
After the Sun Tzu qoute, I qoute Shurangama sutra with specifics.

A----------------------------------------------

Philosophy :

Example:

29. The skillful tactician may be likened to the
shuai-jan. Now the shuai-jan is a snake that is found
in the ChUng mountains. Strike at its head, and you
will be attacked by its tail; strike at its tail, and you
will be attacked by its head; strike at its middle,
and you will be attacked by head and tail both. ---Sun Tzu.

((Sun Tzu's conception informs good kung fu- but particularly informs wing chun. Some key wing chun kuen kuit follows from Sun Tzu))

implementation :

Example:

"Gum Tau Gutt Mai" (he presses your head you lift your tail) "Gum Chong Gan Bil/Pil Bong Folk" (press the center shoot out bong or folk (compare this to the sun tzu qout above)

((hendrik: is that a Cho family kuit? Do you have a tan concept in
Cho family?))
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Technology : Chi Sau, Sensing, Awareness.

Let See what we have in Shurangama Sutra....

B------------------------------------------------------

The Shurangama Sutra
----- Twenty -five Means to Enlightenment.

Sutra:

We first heard the dharma and left the home-life under
King of Awesome Sound Buddha. Once, when it was time for
the Sangha to bathe, I followed the custom and entered the
bathhouse. Suddenly I awakened to the fact that water does not
wash away the dust, nor does it cleanse the body. At that point,
between the two, I became peaceful, and I attained the state of
there being nothing at all.

To this day, I have never forgotten that past experience.
Having left home with the Buddha, I have gone beyond study.
That Buddha named me Bhadrapala. Wonderful touch was
revealed, and I accomplished the position of the Buddha¡¦s
disciple.

(( The refinement of the concept of touch, listening , and ting jing-
certainly follows from this. However, most who dont read the sutras may need to follow-less is more- in refining wing chun practice and minimizing muscle IMO))

The Buddha asks about perfect penetration. As I have been
certified to it, touch is the superior means.

Sutra:

When I first left home to follow the Buddha and enter the
way, I often heard the Thus Come One explain that there is
nothing in this world that brings happiness. Once, when I was
begging in the city, I was reflecting on this Dharma-door and
did not notice a poisonous thorn on the road until it had *****ed
my foot. My entire body experienced physical pain, but my
mind also had an awareness: though it was aware of strong pain
and recognized the feeling of pain, I knew that in my pure
heart, there was neither pain nor awareness of pain.

((This can be empirically proven- from fire walking to the self immolation of Vietnamese monks in protest. In fighting "overcoming" pain is important))

-------------------------------------

Thus, Technically, I don't believe in generazation of Damo's Chan or Northern or Southern Shao Lin CHAN which "mention something but has no specific at all. "
Specific can be found.
We know where the "Technology" comes from. IMHO.
Get a copy of Shurangama Sutra. IT is worthed if one is interested in those cultivation "Technology."

((Hendrik- unfortunately without specific guidance or very
clear two way communication- the Surangama can sound like gibberish and be replaced unfortunately by a follow the leader
ethic or a cult.
Further, there is always the danger of solipsism- of mistaking/projecting one's subjective understanding as the only real world.
Live or dead- Schroedinger's(sp?) cat is indeed a cat not a dog
or a dream! A punch is a punch!!)) Joy

yuanfen

10-19-2003, 09:55 AM

One other point Hendrik--- when you say:

Bottom line, Chan/ Esoteric Buddhism is not a book reading subject. It needs transmission.... Just Can't learn it from reading
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Previous;y you have made a distinction between Chan
and esoteric Buddhism-
linking the latter with the fusion of fujian and emei in wing chun...
here above you have put Chan slash esoteric buddhism- probably needs clarification ...??))

Sandman2[Wing Chun]

10-19-2003, 11:37 AM

Once again, this message board is NOT a Chan Buddhism forum. Lengthy discussions of what Chan is/isn't, etc. are not appropriate for this forum.

ZIM

10-19-2003, 11:53 AM

Yeah! And everyone knows that Wing Chun is Confucian, anyway. I mean, if you're all not squabbling for the 'Mandate of Heaven', who is? :D

Ok, that was a joke...

...note to Hendrik:

I believe that someone/thing was mentioned: Miu Shan? Is this a person or the mountain you refer to? [Classical Chinese is kinda weird that way]

JK Walz

10-19-2003, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by Sandman2[Wing Chun]
Once again, this message board is NOT a Chan Buddhism forum. Lengthy discussions of what Chan is/isn't, etc. are not appropriate for this forum.

What a strange coincidence.....Sandman2's 108th is about NOT Chan Buddhism!

JKW

Phenix

10-20-2003, 08:44 AM

Hi Joy,

((Sun Tzu's conception informs good kung fu- but particularly informs wing chun. Some key wing chun kuen kuit follows from Sun Tzu))

The uniqueness of using SHAPE and MOMENTUM dynamic is very clear in Sun Tzu.

"Gum Tau Gutt Mai" (he presses your head you lift your tail) "Gum Chong Gan Bil/Pil Bong Folk" (press the center shoot out bong or folk (compare this to the sun tzu qout above)

((hendrik: is that a Cho family kuit? Do you have a tan concept in
Cho family?))

The Kuit above is general in different place include Hong Kong. If memory serve, there is one WCK movie in the 1970 even uses these kuit.

Today's TAN is a combination of a number of different concept in Yik Kam WCK.

For example, interm of physical location, Tan's palm end at heart level. and Chao's palm end at solder lever. Which both was named Tan in general WCK today....ect.

((Hendrik- unfortunately without specific guidance or very
clear two way communication- the Surangama can sound like gibberish and be replaced unfortunately by a follow the leader
ethic or a cult.
Further, there is always the danger of solipsism- of mistaking/projecting one's subjective understanding as the only real world.))

That is true.
Chan/esoteric Buddhism,
Even Say, Sun Tzu, one has to learn from teacher. Otherwise, one will inteprete the text with one's own level which can be way off. As we see in Spiral Dynamic, that people in level 1 will base on level 1 as thier lense to view the world.

Zim,

it is Miu Shun.

Phenix

10-20-2003, 09:03 AM

Sensing, Antena, Awareness, connection, Communication?

---------------------Antena and POwer to power connection?

With Fujianess art around 1850, Bridge or kiu was defined as fore arm.
Join or Jit was defined as elbow or knee.

thus, there are 4 kuit for bridge status
and various of bridge technics such as 10...

the 4 kuits are:

1, If there is bridge then one cross the bridge on top. ( the key is cross)

2, if the is no bridge then one adding the bridge. ( the key is add)

3, Seeing bridge thus breaking bridge. ( the key is break)

4, Stick at bridge not leaving bridge. ( the key is stick or Chi as in Chi sau)

-----------------Go wireless, Awareness, communication, Information gathering, communication jamming?

AWARENESS is very important. AWARENESS is not limited to physical stick or CHI, or one Bridge to sense. As said,
The physical can be broken contact but the AWARENESS/ intention never broke down.

Thus, another component beside the physical, location, speed is about COMMUNICATION.

One can brake the opponent down via force or one can brake the opponents' interio COMMUNICATION down to direct or indirectly breaking the DYnamic Structure. (VEry High TECH of this imformation era :D)

As said in Sun Tzu:

15. Those who were called skillful leaders of old knew
how to drive a wedge between the enemy's front and rear;
to prevent co-operation between his large and small divisions;
to hinder the good troops from rescuing the bad,.....

PaulH

10-20-2003, 09:49 AM

Good post, Hendrik! You're really jamming now. Ha! Ha!

Phenix

10-20-2003, 09:57 AM

Hi Paul,

Now you know why it is called : PILLOWING the BRIDGE? Or JUM KIU? or Jamming ... :D (by the way how is your pillow training? :D)

See there are four ways. 1, go power routh, Take the battery off. 2, go communication routh, screw up the signal. and the 3, go center to center routh, reset the cell phone's gsm id card. 4, break the structure routh, slam the cell phone to floor. :D.

From Sun Tzu to Surangama awareness to white crane to emei to cell phone :D

When everything put/fuse together,
Here is Wing Chun and her center to center connection :D

PaulH

10-20-2003, 10:26 AM

The four routes are good! In my cellular war, I use just 2 options. One: He tries to reach but can't quite pin my cell number down. Two: Regardless of whether he can reach me or not on my old cell, I just use a new cell to reach him. He never really connects either way! See Ya!

P.S. Speaking wirelessly, this is just a variation of doing your center to center method. As to the pillow, to hold or not to hold that is the question! All is pillowing as it should be.

yylee

10-20-2003, 11:17 AM

(((Attachment: killbill_11.jpg
This has been downloaded 7 time(s).))

--- should also incorporate Chinese opera acting into WC :D

sinking shoulders and elbows are required in order to play those big, long, hanging sleeves right.

Phenix

10-23-2003, 08:23 AM

update General summary

-----------------------------------------------------

WCK

Style Philosophy:
------- Sun Tzu

Ie: water without same shape, dynamic potential, snake of Chang MT , 5 elements' (give birth, against, neutral, tranformation), Jaming communication to set up chaos, helplessness...,

Core Style implementation:

--Write Crane of Fujian,

ie: center line theory, sun potential, 5 elements hands shape, two arms operation methodolody, inch JIng Join power, and application technics such as Bo Bai... ect.

---Emei 12 Post (Buddhist (esoteric)/Daoist/TCM),

ie: equal shoulder width stance structure with medirians flow, gradual ocean "surf" ( snake moving) soft method training, sticky and jing issuing ( enegy/awareness ) development -- 36 jings and applications, foot work such as forward and reverse 7 stars step .

-----------------------------------------------------

PaulH

10-23-2003, 09:03 AM

Don't forget my all time favorite WC Baat Jaam Do saint - Mushashi, Hendrik! His strokes are just right and fearless. His gaze would unclothe all your naked intentions. And his method: Learn directly from the wild nature (Mountain, I think!) and fields of combat. He is a true WC caveman in every elemental sense of the word! His back to nature call may well be unorthodox and uneducated to the sophistry of our modern days but who can argue against his successful exploits?

Phenix

10-23-2003, 10:34 AM

Originally posted by PaulH
Don't forget my all time favorite WC Baat Jaam Do saint - Mushashi, Hendrik! His strokes are just right and fearless. His gaze would unclothe all your naked intentions. And his method: Learn directly from the wild nature (Mountain, I think!) and fields of combat. He is a true WC caveman in every elemental sense of the word! His back to nature call may well be unorthodox and uneducated to the sophistry of our modern days but who can argue against his successful exploits?

what you just describe is a description of an enlightent Zen monk's behavior while doing martial art.

Book similar to the Unfettered Mind is just a book trying to explain about Chan in the Samurai sword fighting term. read it carefully and you shall see.

IMHO, Chan or Zen is training for developing attentive and vast awareness kind of mind. It says nothing about philosophy or methodology of operation of an art or a task.

If one doesn't have a philosophy or methodology, the vast awareness mind is great but it will sit there and do nothing.

Say, if the Buddha comes to alive today. If he wants to use a Personal Computer, he has to learn the philosophy of Window, how to use it, train to get fluent on it. otherwise, disregards of how enlightent he is he will not be able to use a computer.

Certainly, with the enligthement mind of him, he can learn things very fast and can master and even sees flaws in the computer application .... even fastest and better then normal person or computer expert. But, he has to learn the Way of the computer before his enlightement mind can applied to the full potential.

The elevator name Chan to the top of the mountain of Mastering Computer is for VIP such as the patriach or who have the mindseal only. We have to go step by step using stair. Sorry to disappoint you. But, atleast, I try to tell you where the stair is and not waiting to get enlightement before riding that elevator to the top. what if one doesn't get enligtement or get the mindseal? So, we all line up and stuck infront of the vip elevator?

Historicaly, writing in some Shao Lin book, some Ming generals did hide in Shao Lin or Buddhist temple trying to activate this Chan elevator for advance spiritual penetration martial arts Mountain to counter Qing. that is a fact. But were they success? or some end up become real Buddhist monk give up martial art and preaching no fighting ?

if they succeed then Qing was overthrown. But, the saga of Qing continous....

Just my two cents.

reneritchie

10-23-2003, 11:25 AM

Hendrik,

Amid your posts, you raise a very interesting point:

For those who believe WCK was created to overthrow the Qing, knowing the Qing were not overthrown, do you then believe WCK to be a failure?

PaulH

10-23-2003, 11:31 AM

Hendrik,

Maybe I'm wrong, but Mushashi seemed to advocate learning by experience and devoting oneself wholehearted to the way. The "Spirit" of the thing will reveal the rest! I don't see him mentioning anything about Zen training in his book. What he wrote to his students came out directly from his life and experience. In fact, I think he mentioned somewhere in the book of 5 rings that he did not borrow any confucius or Zen teachings when he tried to relate his way to his followers. So I'm not sure of the idea that he was an enlightened Zen monk prior to practicing MA. More than likely, Zen achievement was a by-product as he reach the end of his MA road to emptiness.

Anyway, your point of Buddha and the computer system is logical. I see no wrong so it must be right! Ha! Ha!

Phenix

10-23-2003, 11:44 AM

Pual,

Read my post again. I mention the Unflettered Mind but not Mushashi right? :D

to advocate learning by experience and devoting oneself wholehearted to the way --P

is that very Zen? :D

In fact, I think he mentioned somewhere in the book of 5 rings that he did not borrow any confucius or Zen teachings when he tried to relate his way to his followers. ---P

Sure, that is in the begining of his book.
he is writing about his art of sword, the 5 rings philosophy and implementation. not a Zen book.
as I try to uncover for WCK if possible.
Even Buddha has to learn Window and practice in typing keyboard right? computer instructor has to write about that. :D

But, You have to be real carefull here. What is Mushashi Pray to? Kanon? KwanYin with thousand hands? What is his core behind the two knives , one long one short, cut like fire....... :D

A Buddhist monk of 1900's , Hung Yee, he is a play boy, musician, he play opera , he get enligtement while dancing.
After enlightement, he go straight to be a monk.
So, everything can triggle enlightenment doesn't has to be only via Zen or OM OM OM everyday.

PaulH

10-23-2003, 12:00 PM

That's great, Hendrik! He is fire incarnated indeed, but he suddued it when he got hold at last the empty ring that bind all rings! So having a fire ring is okay along the quest! Ha! Ha!

canglong

10-23-2003, 02:36 PM

originally posted by hendrik
if they succeed then Qing was overthrown. But, the saga of Qing continous....
originally posted by rene ritchie
For those who believe WCK was created to overthrow the Qing, knowing the Qing were not overthrown, do you then believe WCK to be a failure?
External aggression and domestic oppression sparked off a series of anti-feudal and anti-imperialist movements such as the Taiping Rebellion and the Nian Army Uprising. Under these circumstances, the Qing government was forced to introduce reforms, such as the Self-strengthening Movement and the Hundred-Day Reform, in effort to save and revitalize China. All measures that were doomed to fail. In the end the Revolution of 1911, led by Dr. Sun Yat-sen, enabled the Chinese people to overthrow the Qing imperialists who had ruled China for 268 years. Newsflash.... (http://www.travelchinaguide.com/intro/history/qing.htm) For those that were unaware.

Phenix

10-23-2003, 03:59 PM

External aggression and domestic oppression sparked off a series of anti-feudal and anti-imperialist movements such as the Taiping Rebellion and the Nian Army Uprising. ----------

TaiPing Rebellion = anti-feudal and anti-imperialist ?
What system is implemented in TaiPing heavenly Kingdom?

TaiPing = Shao LIn ?
What is the religion of TaiPing's Son of GOD?
Why is TaiPing did not bond tightly with The Triad? Religion issues?

What is the title of Lee Man Mau when he passed away?
What Kingdom is he belongs to? Ming? or A new starts up Kingdom?

All measures that were doomed to fail. In the end the Revolution of 1911, led by Dr. Sun Yat-sen, enabled the Chinese people to overthrow the Qing imperialists who had ruled China for 268 years. -----

Sun Yat-Sen = Shao LIn?
What religion Sun Yat-Sen believe in?

anerlich

10-23-2003, 05:17 PM

For those who believe WCK was created to overthrow the Qing, knowing the Qing were not overthrown, do you then believe WCK to be a failure?

I'd have to say no, otherwise we'd all look a right bunch of charlies, wouldn't we?

There are many more obvious paths to failure than choosing a deficient martial art in large scale affairs. Both Sun Tzu and Musashi, who the "scholars" on this thread quote extensively for no discernible purpose other than to try to impress, contended that the greatest victories require no fisticuffs or clash of steel.

yuanfen

10-23-2003, 05:20 PM

On Paul Hs post-
on the five rings- imo- the five rings coincide with Buddhist conception of the 5 elements (mahabhutam)- earth, fire, water, wind and emptiness(shunya). Mushashi's work is obviously not about zazen- but on the logic of fighting but the inner spirit is informed by the 5 elements.

On Rene's post_
I dont see how wing chun is automatically vindicated or negated
by the anti Ching work--- not enough "critical mass" can be provided by an art that is better at training individuals than group preparations which needs other elements to supplement individual skills.

On Hendrik's post-
Much is true except see the irrelevancy of the effectiveness of wc in my answer to Rene.

Corruption was not a Qing monopoly. Lots of fuzzy ethics among the Ming too.And- the treachery of the pipsqeaky intellectuals/literati- they often like to be on the winning side
after some rhetorical flourishes.

Re: the Nationalist revolution of Sun yat Sen- didnt live very long afterwards. Sun Yat Sen's land redistribution ideas died soon.Chiang Kai Shek, his wife and brothers--Wellington Koo and others in Kuomintang soon took over. The nationalists were not necessarily friends of Buddhism either- though they were more tolerant than Mao. Chiang Kai Shek's folks lobbed shells into Shaolin- they opposed the Abbot's view of local control which also meant barons/warlords. The KMT had a "western" vision centralised control in a nation state-nationalism--- Koo and Co were elite bankers financiers and under Madame CKS's influence-
methodist fundamentalism was the inhouse way.

After initial caution on CMA the KMT went along with the idea of
national arts kuoshu(sp?)- but they did not revamp things like Mao's overlay on wushu. But Mao's world certainly made a negative dent on the martial elements in many martial arts.

So you have flight /escapes of CMA artists to Taiwan or much southern hands to HK- or going underground in different degrees-
Chen village --- or becoming coaches for the new wu shu.

So onward through the historical fog!! Happy days are here again!!

Phenix

10-23-2003, 05:37 PM

Originally posted by yuanfen
Corruption was not a Qing monopoly. Lots of fuzzy ethics among the Ming too.And- the treachery of the pipsqeaky intellectuals/literati- they often like to be on the winning side
after some rhetorical flourishes.

Joy,

Ming's emperor was force to commit suicide by the contry's rebels riot army. Not by the Qing.

a few top generals of Ming sold out Ming Emperor to qing for thier own self-benifit.

Ming is not as pretty as one picture..... and Qing's KangXi emperor is one of the top ten best emperor of Chinese History. So, what to argue.

Not to mention, the first emperor of Ming is cruel and a person full of suspicious or not trusting others. Look at how his general and ministers end up?

Ming emperor using the "unix":D to spy on the official and remote control. then, it back fire that those "unix" control the royal family and set up puppet emperors.

Chi Qi-Kuang the great general who protect and waroff Japaness pirates and compile a new training method for Ming military can't even afford for a Coffin when he die. His friends gather the money for his burried. Chi is a Buddhist. He has a practiced of recite the Diamond Sutra for his people who die in the battle.

There is lots of Romance in Fan Qing Fu Ming movements. Certainly, one can understand it is painfull for the manchurian to conqure and rule china.

I dont see how wing chun is automatically vindicated or negated
by the anti Ching work ---Joy

what if WCK is as simple as the martial art of the opera singers and got roll into the turbulance of Taiping rebellion after the Opium War?

canglong

10-23-2003, 06:18 PM

Sun Yat-sen
Born Nov. 12, 1866 in Guangdong province
1879 Studies medicine in Hawaii
1895 Leads first insurrection against Qing dynasty
1905 Develops "Three Principles of the People"
1911 Qing dynasty is overthrown
1913 Kuomintang, the party he founded, wins national election but is soon expelled from parliament
1925 Dies March 12 in Beijing
Thus, when the Manchu dynasty at last collapsed in 1911, in some measure because of the ceaseless pressure exerted by Sun and his revolutionary followers, he was named provisional President of the new Chinese republic.

Though they clung feebly on for another decade, this was the end of the Qing, and internal movements to dismantle the dynastic system and build a new China proliferated. The most influential of these was the Tong Meng Hui society, founded in 1905 in Japan by the exile Sun Yatsen, a doctor from a wealthy Guangdong family.

Born in 1866 to a farming family in southeast China, not far from Macau and Hong Kong, Sun received a few years of local schooling in traditional Chinese texts. At 13 he moved to Hawaii, where his elder brother had emigrated. Three years of study in a Honolulu boarding school run by the Church of England were followed by more than a decade in Hong Kong, where Sun was baptized a Christian and gained certificates of proficiency in medicine and surgery. He practiced medicine briefly in Hong Kong in 1893.
He was a Chinese patriot of a more traditional kind, an admirer of rebels who had pitted their lives against the ruling Manchu dynasty (or Qing) and was at home within the conspiratorial worlds of Chinese secret societies.
The Qing overthrown (http://travel.yahoo.com/p-travelguide-734174-china_1644_to_1911_the_qing_dynasty_war_and_rebell ion-i)

Life and times of Sun Yat-Sen
(http://www.time.com/time/asia/asia/magazine/1999/990823/sun_yat_sen1.html)
Tong Meng Hui society (http://edu.ocac.gov.tw/CultureEnglish/Story/Estory0401_07.htm)

reneritchie

10-23-2003, 07:43 PM

Tony,

My apologies, I mistakenly thought it was obvious in the post that 'not overthrown' meant by 'not overthrown by an army of rebels trained in WCK'.

Or are you contending Dr. Sun's army was trained in WCK, and WCK was the primary reason for their victory over the Qing?

BTW- Are you aware that according to historians (see: Secret Societies Reconsidered by Owensby et al) , Dr. Sun was primarily responsible for the spread of the Shaolin-Triad connection myth? (He thought it would make it easier to enlist the aid of off-shore Triads if they believed they came from patriotic roots).

canglong

10-23-2003, 08:42 PM

Rene,

But, the saga of Qing continous.... Generally I find these Hendrikism anything but obvious. The extent and role of the secret societies and the subsequent overthrow of the Qing may never fully be realized.
For example, in Guangdong province in 1854-1855, a Hung-style organization known as the Red Turbans rose up in revolt against the Ching government. Although this was a widespread uprising which spread across several counties and involved tens of thousands of people fighting in some battles the rebels never developed a centralized leadership. Footnote Two Similarly, even during the large turn of the century Boxer uprising, effective centralized leadership of the Boxers proved to be a problem. Footnote Three The cumulative effects of these battles has to be inserted into the equation when discussing the long term demise of the Qing Dynasty.

The Hung Societies (http://www.capital.net/~phuston/hung.html)

CarlDouglas108

10-24-2003, 05:58 AM

If you check out the Endnotes on that link, The Hung Society (http://www.capital.net/~phuston/hung.html) they wrote this,

1. The bulk of this material comes from a few primary sources. Morgan's Triad Societies of Hong Kong.(1960, Crown Copyright Reserved, The Government Printer, Hong Kong) is an excellent source for information on the structure and form of Triad societies in Hong Kong shortly after the second world war. (The author asserted that these traditions were in decline during the period he wrote and researched the subject.) Unfortunately, Morgan tends to skimp a bit on the development of this form.

Ward and Stirling's The Hung Society. (privately published, London, 1925.) contained the best possible description of the societies available to the authors. This was based on extensive research done during their stint as civil servants in the Crown colony of Malaya

Dian H. Murray, in collaboration with Qin Biaoqi, produced The Origins of the Tiandihui -The Chinese Triads in Legend and History. (1994, Stanford University Press, Stanford California). This valuable work contains little information on the later form of the societies, but it does contain invaluable information on how they were founded and spread. This source describes the early, haphazard recruiting practices which had apparently been changed by the time Morgan wrote.

2. Wakeman, Frederic. 1966. Strangers at the Gate -Social Disorder in South China, 1839-1861. University of California Press. Berkeley.

3. It should be mentioned that the Boxers were based on a Ching style structure. This would be expected as they orginated in the north of China. Nevertheless, they shared the same problem of central organization.

4. From Ward and Stirling, The Hung Society, Volume I., pp. 14-15. London, 1925. Privately published in a limited edition.

5. Macao is a city located on the Southern coast of China not far from Hong Kong. There are convenient ferry and hydrofoil services shuttling between the two locations. Macao was founded in the sixteenth century by the Portuguese as a base of trade with China. For centuries it has been a Portuguese colony and at the time of this writing still is. It is scheduled to be returned to Chinese rule in 1999.

6. pp. 102-103, "Some Notes on the Ko-Lao Hui in Late Ch'ing China," by Charlton M. Lewis. In Popular Movements and Secret Societies in China, 1840-1950. Edited by Jean Chesnaux.

The internal structure of the Ko-Lao Hui is quite interesting and described fully in the section on this organization in chapter sixteen.

7. Ward and Stirling, Volume One, Page 16.

8. By way of contrast, see Morgan's description of Hung societies and compare it to Dian H. Murray.

8. Ward and Stirling, Volume One, page 16.

For more details on Chinese numerology and number beliefs, a good beginning reference is Chinese Numbers -Significance, Symbolism, and Traditions. by Evelyn Lip. (1992, Heian International, Inc. Union City, California.)

It's quite interesting the amount of research they did on this.

Regards

CD

reneritchie

10-24-2003, 07:36 AM

Carl,

I have, (and have referenced in previous articles mentioned on this thread), several of those books, and indeed, believe anyone serious about WCK history has to understand the time and place, and related history (such as in those books), and their theory must fit within the bounds of said.

IMHO, it is a grave mistake to have a theory and then set out to prove it--too much chance for bias (preconception) and selectivity (ignoring what does not match the large investment previously made). Rather, I think we must let the art speak for itself, and gather what information we can to see what theory is suggested by it (rather than imposed on it.)

Tony,

Again, what part are you saying shows directly the primary reason for the fall of the Qing being an army of trained WCK warriors?

Phenix

10-24-2003, 08:02 AM

Rene,

If my memory serve,
Sun Yat Sen's Body Guard is Du Xing Wu of Zee Ran Men or the Door of Natural. nothing said about WCK warrior.

Another body guard,

In 1922 he deserted his Wife and moved to China to become a body guard for Sun Yat Sen.

Although he never learned to speak Mandarin or any of the other Chinese dialects he did become a General in the Nationalist Army.

Sun Yat Sen had untiled the Nationalists and the Communists to fight against the Japanese.

The Chinese couldn¡¦t pronounce his name and because he wore two guns they called him Two Gun Cohen.

http://servercc.oakton.edu/~friend/abbey2.html

Sorry still no WCK warrior around Sun Yat Sen.

Phenix

10-24-2003, 08:29 AM

Generally I find these Hendrikism anything but obvious. ---C

Hendrikism is just scientificism. not "against-personalism."

I always look for data of evidents to support. as for those involvement to the 1850's movement, I believe there are some WCK ancestors involve.

But, then, someone from this ancestors has to show the code of that time. without that code, it is similar to saying I own the safe which store diamond in B O A, but I don't have the passed words. But that is all mine diamond.

Which secret societies? the one from Shao Lin or the one from those overseas chineses students who go study in Hawii, in england, in Japan,....

Taiping is pretty successful in the begining. But too bad, it called itself The Taiping Heavenly Kingdom but NOT MING. Thus, it is not about overthrown Qing Return to MIng. it is about someone wants to be the king himself.

canglong

10-24-2003, 08:24 PM

Rene,

Tony, Again, what part are you saying shows directly the primary reason for the fall of the Qing being an army of trained WCK warriors?

Rene, my first reply was an attempt to dispell the notion that the Qing are still in business.
originally posted by hendrik
if they succeed then Qing was overthrown. But, the saga of Qing continous.... Then my next post was to point out that an army of revolutionist wing chun practitioners did exist and was instrumental in the eventual overthrow of the Qing Dynasty.

The primary reason for the eventual fall of the Qing was not the main focal point of my post, that would be that indeed wing chun practicing armies were in existance and did play a role in bringing down the Qing. Nothing more nothing less.

as for primary...
After the mid-Qing period, the dynasty failed to adjust as new problems arose. Rampant corruption, a steady decentralization of power, warfare, rebellions, overpopulation and economic disasters plagued the once glorious empire. Rebellions sprouted like mushrooms after a rain, one of which, the uprising by the White Lotus Sect, that lasted for nine years, put an end to the golden age of the Qing. In 1840, the 20th year of the Daoguang reign, the Opium War, an armed invasion of China by foreign capitalists, broke out. The Qing government was forced to sign a series of unreasonable treaties, which demanded China to cede territories, pay indemnities and/or open trading ports. Eventually China became a semi-feudal and semi-colonized country.
You or anyone else is free to choose one of the many reasons as being primary yet which ever you choose it is as it should be forever inevitably tied to the unseen work of the Hung men and women of the secret societies, and though the Ming did not reclaim command of China this does not deminish in any way the efforts and contributions of those unsung wing chun soldiers who fought valiantly from day one to accomplish that end.

John Weiland

10-24-2003, 08:41 PM

Originally posted by yuanfen
Re: the Nationalist revolution of Sun yat Sen- didnt live very long afterwards. Sun Yat Sen's land redistribution ideas died soon.Chiang Kai Shek, his wife and brothers--Wellington Koo and others in Kuomintang soon took over. The nationalists were not necessarily friends of Buddhism either- though they were more tolerant than Mao. Chiang Kai Shek's folks lobbed shells into Shaolin- they opposed the Abbot's view of local control which also meant barons/warlords. The KMT had a "western" vision centralised control in a nation state-nationalism--- Koo and Co were elite bankers financiers and under Madame CKS's influence-
methodist fundamentalism was the inhouse way.
As an historical footnote, this may be as on topic as anything on this thread.

Madame Chiang, 105, the widow of Chiang Kai Shek, died today.
(http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=68&ncid=68&e=4&u=/nyt/20031024/ts_nyt/madamechiang105chineseleaderswidowdies)

Regards,

Phenix

10-24-2003, 10:20 PM

History of Triad = HIstory of WCK?

Original of Triad = Original of WCK?

Triad = Shao Lin?

Chan = WCK ?

Over thrown Qing is WCK's mission? If so What Happen with CLF ?

What Sun Yat-Sen and Chiang Kai-sek got todo with WCK?

:confused:

Savi

10-24-2003, 11:32 PM

Originally posted by Phenix
History of Triad = HIstory of WCK?

Original of Triad = Original of WCK?

Triad = Shao Lin?

Chan = WCK ?

:confused: IMO Hendrik needs to stick with his own White Crane = Sun Tzu = Taiji = Cameron Diaz before spreading more illusions through this forum.

It is VERY clear you do not understand what Shaolin is in history or in nature. Thus you paint a picture of modern day society's views of the Triad organizations ( the ones corrupted by the opium wars) with the essense of Shaolin. Playing a joker to the crowd? Or painting a false picture of other research parties?

If you're :confused: about your own question, why not ask the people who are studying the roots of Shaolin Wing Chun (hint hint VTM) rather than the people who (seriously) aren't?!? Otherwise, it's much healthier to stay on your own research path than stir up trouble to give other people a hard time. Oh wait, you already burnt those bridges haven't you! Never mind.

Phenix

10-25-2003, 12:29 AM

More Questions

WCK founder = ET?

Shao LIn = AS ET like to define it?

Qing Triad = historians are wrong only the ET claim is the truth ?

Original of WCK = ET say so you have to agree or you are wrong if you question?

Where ET live = no where in the world, it is beyond this planet.

Original WCK lineage = Blood line of Dracula

Yat Chan = One Zen = Emptiness = non existance?

Code of anti-Qing Rebel = can't tell you the Qing will come to get me?

WCK = Wing Can Kook? Yen Can cook?

WCK founder = Yen the cook ?

Anti- Qing = KILL BILL ?

Shao LIn MONKs = Anti Qing?

:confused:

Mckind13

10-25-2003, 12:35 AM

Hi Savi,

How much history have you read?

In the books I have read, the triads existed since China existed. Though not originally triads, benevolent societies were a presence in the country for a very long time. As for the Opium wars etc, if I remember my reading, the Triads, Heaven and Earth and the Red Bandana Gangs failed pretty miserably. Not only that but often they were more ruthless, dangerous and oppressive then the government they were overthrowing.

It seems that little if any real association can be found between these pseudo-religious groups and real Chan Buddhism.

What’s your take please?

David

Mckind13

10-25-2003, 12:42 AM

canglong

"Clearly, it is entirely incorrect to see the many secret societies of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as a single, large, centrally controlled organization held under the sway of a tyrannical despot who ruled from hiding. Not only did the technology prohibit attempts to control the geographically widespread societies in such a fashion, there was little benefit to the group as a whole from such centralization."

This was in the article you posted, how does this help the secret master train everyone in the secret Shaolin system theory?

David

Phenix

10-25-2003, 12:51 AM

He is a monk and from shao lin and has Chan lineage.

http://home.wanadoo.nl/info-kungfu-supply/shigaocan/

his art doesn't look WC isn't it?

So Which shao Lin WCK from?

KPM

10-25-2003, 04:40 AM

Originally posted by canglong
Rene,

Rene, my first reply was an attempt to dispell the notion that the Qing are still in business. Then my next post was to point out that an army of revolutionist wing chun practitioners did exist and was instrumental in the eventual overthrow of the Qing Dynasty.

---Now this is the part of the "history" that I have a problem with. Just what evidence is there that any such army trained in WCK existed? An "army" implies a fair number of people. What happened to the members of this army that left the society or were remnants of the army after the society later lost its revolutionary focuse or disbanded? Wouldn't they have continued to practice or teach their WCK? I just cannot see how an entire ARMY of WCK soldiers could fail to leave a trace of their art behind. Yet we find no real evidence of WCK prior to the Red Boat era. The other problem I have with this idea of HFY being a military system is that it does not include the typical battlefield weapons or tactics. Armies typically fought on the battlefield in formations, not one on one. So were are the HFY tactics that teach typical military troop formations? The typical battlefield weapons of the day include such things as halberds, spears, and swords with shields that are not part of the HFY curriculum. I see nothing unique in HFY that sets it apart as a "military " or "battlefield" martial art any more than what the recent book likes to refer to as "Popular Wing Chun."

Keith

canglong

10-25-2003, 07:14 AM

originally posted by hendrik
Historicaly, writing in some Shao Lin book, some Ming generals did hide in Shao Lin or Buddhist temple trying to activate this Chan elevator for advance spiritual penetration martial arts Mountain to counter Qing. that is a fact. Glad you finally see the light as far as this topic is concerned.
originally posted by hendrik
He is a monk and from shao lin and has Chan lineage. First you advocate the argument that no shaolin warriors monks ever existed now you are finding them yourself. Now we can move on from this topic as well.
originally posted by keith
Yet we find no real evidence of WCK prior to the Red Boat era. The other problem I have with this idea of HFY being a military system is that it does not include the typical battlefield weapons or tactics. Armies typically fought on the battlefield in formations, not one on one. So were are the HFY tactics that teach typical military troop formations? The typical battlefield weapons of the day include such things as halberds, spears, and swords with shields that are not part of the HFY curriculum. I see nothing unique in HFY that sets it apart as a "military " or "battlefield" martial art any more than what the recent book likes to refer to as "Popular Wing Chun." The book "Mastering Kung Fu" answered these questions, using the book as a reference try researching some of these as well as any other questions you might have on your own and I think you will find some of the answers to your questions. You are also invited to join the discussion of these and many other topics of the book over at hfy108.

reneritchie

10-25-2003, 08:27 AM

Weren't the Qing quite involved with Buddhism and Shaolin as well?

KPM

10-25-2003, 10:30 AM

Originally posted by canglong
The book "Mastering Kung Fu" answered these questions,

---No it doesn't. I have the book, I have read it, and it generates more questions than it answers. It has no references or footnotes to direct anyone in their own research as you suggest.

Keith

Phenix

10-25-2003, 10:31 AM

Canglong,

Hahahahahaha,

I don't know about you but I am a legit southern shao lin disciple. Suprise suprise.

This monk is my Sigung of Shao Lin style.
My sifu is his monk student Ven. Fa Chan.
I study with Ven Fa Chan from Chan Buddhism to accupuncture to martial art.

So Sorry to tell you, his art is NOT WCK but Lohan Kuen, Iron palm... ect and very far from WCK.

See, one can brought up all the shao lin north, shao lin south, shao lin east, shao lin west. Monk warriors....
But what is that got to do with WCK?
How to prof they are related?

HOw do one prove one's art is from southern Shao Lin?
How do one prof one's MONK lineage related to a Southern Shao Lin not even mention WCK yet?

Finally, even one is a legit Southern Shao Lin disciple. That say nothing about WCK.

Phenix

10-25-2003, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by reneritchie
Weren't the Qing quite involved with Buddhism and Shaolin as well?

Sure,

You can read about Qing and Shao Lin and Warrior Monks and the color of the cloth the Han Monks and the Lama monks wears in the lecture of Chan patriach HSu Yun as I have qoute long time ago.

Qing Emperor Yung Chern is a Chan Buddhist who had attain Satory or enlignthement. Read that in Buddhist history of China.

passing_through

10-25-2003, 03:27 PM

Going into the history a bit, looking at revolutionary societies from the Ming to the Qing to the Nationalists, there are some things to keep in mind. Between the Opium Wars and the Boxer Rebellion, there was a schism that developed in the various revolutionary groups. While some had always been predatory in nature from their conception, others were genuinely focused on overthrowing the Qing and restore the Ming. The merits of the Ming are open to debate. Looking at those times from now, we have a different sense of the Ming and the Qing. It is true that the first emperor of the Qing was very supportive of Buddhism and did much to spread the teachings of Buddha. It is also true that towards the end of the Ming Dynasty the government was fairly corrupt. However, it is necessary to remember that the people at that time had quite a different view of being ruled by the Qing vs. the Ming. The Chu family was of the Han race, the Manchu were not. So, regardless of any social or economic reforms created by the Qing, they also forced all non-Manchu men to shave the front of their heads and plait their hair into long tails, reminiscent of the back end of a horse (among other mistreatments). So, some groups organized to fight against the Qing. The VTM has found some evidence that the Ming royal family was instrumental in creating at least one revolutionary group with the support of a Chan family (Chan like Chan Wah Shun, not like the form of Buddhism). Secret Societies of one sort or another have existed in China for centuries so the creation of another was no great shift in thinking.

After the establishment of the Qing Dynasty in 1683, most of the rebellious groups went underground. From current VTM research, Wing Chun was created in the time between the fall of the Ming and the establishment of the Qing – around 40 years between 1644-1683. This date may change with the collection of new information but it’s the working model we have right now.

Jumping forwards to the 1800s, the three Opium Wars occurred and the revolutionary groups involved didn’t fare well – and sanctions were levied against China. The revolutionary groups lost much in the way of popular support through the increasingly harsh sanction. At this time, a schism developed in the revolutionary groups. With the increase in drug trade, some groups wanted to maintain control of the drugs and continue to make money (there had always been groups involved in drugs, sex, racketeering, etc. in China for centuries). Other groups wanted to focus on keeping the foreigners off Chinese soil. Still other groups took no interest in either money or political action and instead focused on martial arts. Rolling forward to the Boxer Rebellion and its failure to remove the foreign powers, popular opinion towards the secret societies reached the lowest levels. Each of the three types of societies went even more underground, becoming many of the secret societies of today.

In terms of the fall of the Qing Dynasty, it happened with the support of the politically focused secret societies. These societies, in an earlier age, were anti-Qing and included training in martial arts – just as in the criminal societies and the martial societies. Yet, each of the three groups had different focus. HFY comes out of the martial societies – related to the political and criminal groups in the sense of a common history BUT walking a different path.

Keith: WCK was designed for fighting one-to-one, not group-on-group. Southern systems share this in common, an emphasis on one-to-one skills as opposed to small unit vs. small unit tactics. In Mastering Kung Fu, this is what was meant – the military strategic and tactic thinking was involved in the creation of the system and in the logic of the training methods. This is not to say that the system was designed to train a single soldier to function as part of a larger squad, platoon, company, battalion or regiment. Yet – with an understanding of how the limbs support each other, each part of the body can be considered as an element in an overall strategy; thus, the body serves as a vehicle to understand all forms of combat (think of combined arms warfare wherein artillery softens up a target (legs), then mechanized infantry move in to mop up (hands) – VERY simplistic analogy to the type of training in HFY that I have experienced).

In the revolutionary secret societies many styles were taught and utilized – HFY was not necessarily *the* hand-to-hand system of all cells in the societies – especially in light of the widespread use of hung ga... and even it HFY was, there are many training tracks that develop different hand-to-hand skills. In the societies not everyone was taught to understand why they did what they did. They were taught – if here, do this; if there, do that – and Kiu Sau and/or Chi Sau served to plug the holes in skill by developing fast reactions. Historically, not everyone was taught the whole HFY system.

Jeremy R.

yuanfen

10-25-2003, 04:34 PM

Passing through sez:

From current VTM research, Wing Chun was created in the time between the fall of the Ming and the establishment of the Qing – around 40 years between 1644-1683
---------------------------------------------------

((Not a bad time frame to focus on for research though continuities can be problematic. Old problem of putting a time slot for Gee Shim-if he existed at all. Long before the VTM it was easy to notice that many contemporary styles claim their origin in
those turbulent years.. BTW that is intended to be a positive comment on that part of the post))

Train

10-25-2003, 07:01 PM

Thanks for the Info Jeremy!!

canglong

10-25-2003, 08:19 PM

originally posted by hendrik
I don't know about you but I am a legit southern shao lin disciple. Suprise suprise. This monk is my Sigung of Shao Lin style.
originally posted by hendrik
I am the oldest WCner in China in my dream last night. In the dream , I remember I live in Shao LIn cave.
DAMO is my siheng and my name is DARING he taught me WCK which he brought from India. I am The zero generation of Shao LIn. Your Sigung and sifu must be so proud of you.

KPM

10-26-2003, 05:52 AM

Hi Jeremy! Thanks for the well-thought-out reply! But it still leaves several questions unanswered.

You wrote:
WCK was designed for fighting one-to-one, not group-on-group. Southern systems share this in common, an emphasis on one-to-one skills as opposed to small unit vs. small unit tactics. In Mastering Kung Fu, this is what was meant – the military strategic and tactic thinking was involved in the creation of the system and in the logic of the training methods.

---OK. I can accept that. But again, why were the "standard" battlefield weapons of the day not taught? The history I have heard and that seems plausible to me about the WCK weapons is that the pole came from the Red Junks because it was a implement that was used daily and therefore readily at hand. The knifes were favored because they were more easily concealed and handy to have in an urban enrionment with narrow alleyways and buildings with small rooms. All this fits with WCK being part of a secretive group of rebellious minded people living and traveling on boats in coastal cities in fear of being discovered and attacked by local authorities at any time, not with WCK being the hand to hand combat method of an army. Why would you field an army on a conventional (for the day) battlefield with a pole rather than a spear or two short knives rather than a darn dao and shield or a kwan dao or any number of other actual battlefield weapons?

You also noted:
In the revolutionary secret societies many styles were taught and utilized – HFY was not necessarily *the* hand-to-hand system of all cells in the societies – especially in light of the widespread use of hung ga...

---But the book says that HFY was developed and used to train an entire ARMY to fight against the Qing. Nothing is said about it being limited to just a few small "cells." Did the book overstate its case? Again, to me what is implied is a fair number of people. What happened to this army in later years? Why do we not see remnants or suggestions of HFY left behind by the many members of this army that surely would have continued to practice and possibly teach what they had learned? We certainly see remnants of other martial arts used by the secret societies. Why not HFY? So in other words, other martial arts associated with the rebels were not kept secret. So how or why was HFY? No disrepect intended. I'm just trying to figure it all out and this idea that HFY was somehow the hand to hand combat method of an entire army just doesn't seem very plausible. The hand to hand self-defense method of a small group of opera performers interested in rebellion.?...this seems more plausible to me, and somewhat supported by known history. When historical support is limited or non-existant, we have to look at what is less likely and what is more likely. I didn't see anything in "Mastering Kung Fu" to support the theory of WCK as military training for an army as opposed to WCK as self-defense training for a small rebel group. It just seems very unlikely to me, and I doubt that I'm the only one that feels that way given the current evidence.

Keith

Mckind13

10-26-2003, 08:15 AM

KPM,

I totally agree with you regarding your questions concerning the choice of weapons on the battlefield. My understanding is that at the time, riffles were in common use. Additionally, I have seen parts of the HFY and Andres Hoffman’s pole forms and they did not seem particularly suited for fighting on a line or in a charge.

Furthermore, I had a conversation with **** Loewenhagen at one of the VTM seminars. He told me that the pole could beat every other weapon and that the knives could defeat the pole. He also told me that the pole was the king of weapons! Without nitpicking, because he is not here, the spear is the king of weapons and the Chinese did quite well with the bayonets after they exhausted their rounds.

I think from the standpoint of hand to hand combat the long pole is very effective but not the optimum weapon for the battlefield. That would be the spear. As far as dealing with the two blades as in the Baat Jam Dao, I would put my money on the pole or spearman any day. The small blades may work against the larger weapon but unless I am in an area to small to wield the pole, my mobility and the shear strength and flexibility of the pole makes if far superior.

David

Savi

10-26-2003, 11:40 AM

Originally posted by KPM
But again, why were the "standard" battlefield weapons of the day not taught? The history I have heard and that seems plausible to me about the WCK weapons is that the pole came from the Red Junks because it was a implement that was used daily and therefore readily at hand. The knifes were favored because they were more easily concealed and handy to have in an urban enrionment with narrow alleyways and buildings with small rooms. All this fits with WCK being part of a secretive group of rebellious minded people living and traveling on boats in coastal cities in fear of being discovered and attacked by local authorities at any time, not with WCK being the hand to hand combat method of an army. Why would you field an army on a conventional (for the day) battlefield with a pole rather than a spear or two short knives rather than a darn dao and shield or a kwan dao or any number of other actual battlefield weapons? I know you are asking Jeremy for an answer, but in the meantime I think this might provide some more information on the swords to digest before he answers. Right now I am looking for information on the Gwan (pole) for you as I know I have read background information on it before.

http://home.vtmuseum.org/articles/meng/butterflyknives.php

My understanding is that the anti-qing fighters did not exclusively use HFY as their only system of combat on the field - nor did they even know they were using HFYWCK. Based on what I understand, the name HFYWCK was only known to insiders - high level revolutionaries. A more general name was given to them, at this point though I do not know what they called it. But for certain I do know that the full name HFYWCK was only known by inside circles.
Originally posted by KPM
You (Jeremy) also noted:
In the revolutionary secret societies many styles were taught and utilized – HFY was not necessarily *the* hand-to-hand system of all cells in the societies – especially in light of the widespread use of hung ga...

---But the book says that HFY was developed and used to train an entire ARMY to fight against the Qing. Nothing is said about it being limited to just a few small "cells." Did the book overstate its case? Again, to me what is implied is a fair number of people. What happened to this army in later years? Why do we not see remnants or suggestions of HFY left behind by the many members of this army that surely would have continued to practice and possibly teach what they had learned? We certainly see remnants of other martial arts used by the secret societies. Why not HFY? So in other words, other martial arts associated with the rebels were not kept secret. So how or why was HFY? No disrepect intended. I'm just trying to figure it all out and this idea that HFY was somehow the hand to hand combat method of an entire army just doesn't seem very plausible. Might I suggest you reread chapter 5 of the book? Page 76. Also what separates HFY from the other battlefield combat systems of the time was its foundation on the WC Formula. In this chapter it discusses the origins of the formula and its application to the human form. This new weapon of warfare (so to speak) was viewed as such a high level of sophistication that to make every combat troop aware they were using it would be considered a very high risk to themselves. Even consider that it poses potential information leaks for the Qing forces who would capture POW's. Thus Hung Gun Biu's development of HFY's two track approach: SNT and SLT. According to HFY history, this is where you first see the three levels of combat training: Siu Nim/Lim Tau, Chum Kiu and Biu Jee. It is within these levels where the Muk Yan Jong, weapons, and the physical expression of the WC formula (and no it was not a potion for you comedians out there) was disseminated to the troops. the technical information of the formula was not taught to everyone out there. So if you get a chance to reread this chapter, I hope it will clear up the picture more for you.
Originally posted by KPM
The hand to hand self-defense method of a small group of opera performers interested in rebellion.?...this seems more plausible to me, and somewhat supported by known history. When historical support is limited or non-existant, we have to look at what is less likely and what is more likely. I didn't see anything in "Mastering Kung Fu" to support the theory of WCK as military training for an army as opposed to WCK as self-defense training for a small rebel group. It just seems very unlikely to me, and I doubt that I'm the only one that feels that way given the current evidence. Hopefully I won't get attacked for this, but have you ever considered that the WC brought to the Hung Suen (Red Boats) are the remnants you are looking for? Consider the diagram on page 28 of the book, and hopefully you can relate to my train of thought.

Zhuge Liang

10-26-2003, 12:17 PM

Hi Savi,

Originally posted by Savi
Hopefully I won't get attacked for this, but have you ever considered that the WC brought to the Hung Suen (Red Boats) are the remnants you are looking for? Consider the diagram on page 28 of the book, and hopefully you can relate to my train of thought. [/B]

Interesting hypothesis, but can you explain why the "remnant" wck looks, feels, and operates so different from hfywck? Considering that Pien Sun, YKS/Sum Nung, Yik Kam, and Yip Man WCK are all much closer to each other than they are to HFYWCK, it shows that they share a common root to at least the Red Boats. Now if Hung Gun Biu (of HFY) was of around the same generation as Wong Wah Bo and the others, how do you explain the vast divergence of the systems in such a short time?

Regards,
Alan

passing_through

10-26-2003, 02:56 PM

Keith,

why were the "standard" battlefield weapons of the day not taught?

Look at the two weapons of Wing Chun: double knife and pole. Based on these two weapons, a practitioner can be given a technical understanding of many different types of weapons in a short period of time.

In brief, the double knives contain concepts and movements for: edge weapon tactics such as slice, chop, hack, stab, bash, weapon catch; they also teach paired weapon usage, short weapon length, and light weapons. The long pole contains the movements and concepts for blunt trauma weapons tactics such as thrust, redirect, circle, press, and bar in addition to single weapon usage, long weapon usage, and heavy weapons. Put together, you have a tactical understanding of all possible hand-to-hand weapons except for thrown/projectile weapons and momentum weapons (throwing knife/star, bow/arrow, rope dart, chain whip). Going further, both the knife and pole fit within the constructs of maintaining your own space - to use a throwing weapon or a momentum weapon, I have to go out of my way to kill in the former and maintain a high level of aggression in the latter.

As for the origins of the pole - the Spear was considered the king of the battlefield in ancient times. However, you can't bring a spear into the temple. When you cut the head off, you ended up with a single headed pole, reminiscent of the Wing Chun gwan. Spear shafts can range from 6' to 15' with a median length of 9' also reminiscent of the Wing Chun gwan. Finally, the military spear makes use of 13 concepts. When you cut off the spear tip, you lose some of the concept as you've lost the ability to cut your opponent through changing the weapon from bladed to blunt force trauma. With the collapse of the Ming and the loss of its formal military structures, soldiers and Generals sought refuge to foment revenge. One of those places was the Southern Shaolin Temple. In the early 1600s a General visited the Shaolin and trained the monks in the use of the pole. With the advance of the Qing, some groups fled from the Northern Shaolin to the Southern Shaolin bringing with them knowledge of the pole.

In answer to your question about army training, it is important that the trainers know what they are doing. Hence, use usage of the pole and double-knife to abbreviate the overall training process. Individual groups of soldiers could be taught specific sets of concepts with a specific weapon such as a Kwan Dao in a relatively short period of time. As I stated before, it wasn't necessary to teach everyone the whole system. Training was strictly based on a 'need-to-know' basis.

But the book says that HFY was developed and used to train an entire ARMY to fight against the Qing. Nothing is said about it being limited to just a few small "cells." Did the book overstate its case?

I think you're missing the context - an army of anti-revolutionaries trying to maintain secrecy. It seems to me that it would be intuitively obvious that such an army wouldn't be comprised of 100,000s of people - it would be a much smaller scale - in the 1000s. The Qing very quickly took control of large areas of the China. As they established control, the resistance they met was less in the form of Ming Dynasty fielded armies and more in the form of scattered groups organized around strong personalities. One such group was the Cheung family that controlled Taiwan. They had close to 300 ships in their navy and gave the Qing quite a bit of trouble. It was the defeat of the Cheng family that signaled the consolidation of the Qing in 1683.

Why do we not see remnants or suggestions of HFY left behind by the many members of this army that surely would have continued to practice and possibly teach what they had learned?

I think that is open to debate - what constitutes remnants or suggestions of HFY? There are aspects of body mechanics that are similar throughout the southern styles of Kung Fu. We're collecting more information in this regard - but in order to establish an evidentiary link, the systems in question have to be mapped out. This takes quite a lot of time and effort and resources are limited. However, I recently had an opportunity to speak with an Ng Jou (Five Ancestor) practitioner and in their Chi Sau they make use of a body structure that could be classified as Yin Line but he wasn't conscious of why he placed his elbows where he did - he just knew that it was better than other places through 10 years of hard training. His Sifu didn't make reference of Yin Lines either - but mentioned about placement of the elbow based on experience over time.

other martial arts associated with the rebels were not kept secret.

I'm sure you can appreciate that this is only relevant for other arts, not all. Why and when some arts were made public is not germane, in my opinion, to the time and place of HFY going public. It remains to be see if other arts will come to the public in the future.

I didn't see anything in "Mastering Kung Fu" to support the theory of WCK as military training for an army as opposed to WCK as self-defense training for a small rebel group.

Look over the context I outlined above and let me know what you think.

Jeremy R.

passing_through

10-26-2003, 02:57 PM

Alan.

can you explain why the "remnant" wck looks, feels, and operates so different from hfywck?

What is meant by "operates so differently"? I'm not clear on your question so I can't answer.

Considering that Pien Sun, YKS/Sum Nung, Yik Kam, and Yip Man WCK are all much closer to each other than they are to HFYWCK

I'd like to know on what you are making your statement in regards to the lineage you listed as being "closer to each other than they are to HFY" - In my experience, HFY is closer to Yip Man than Yip Man is to Yik Kam; HFY is closer to Pan Nam than Pan Nam is to Yip Man. You're statement is open to debate.

Now if Hung Gun Biu (of HFY) was of around the same generation as Wong Wah Bo and the others, how do you explain the vast divergence of the systems in such a short time?

It seems to me that you assuming that all members of the Red Boat had equal opportunity and access to all information. The VTM’s theory is that Wing Chun existed prior to the Red Boat. As such, what occurred during the timeframe of the Red Boat included four “flavors” of Wing Chun: the original system, the original system mixed with other systems, the original system mixed with personal interpretation and the original system mixed with both other systems and personal interpretation. If this was the case, at the time of the Red Boat, there would be elements common to all flavors of Wing Chun as well as unique parts of each system.

As for an example of teaching diverging over time, look at the Ip Man lineage - there are approximately three 'generations' of students in Hong Kong and a fourth in China (I put 'generations' in quotes as all these students were directly Ip Man but learned during different times/places). Comparing these groups the teachings are often quite different - and that's only one generation of students. The students two layers removed from Ip Man are already starting to differ in their approach to Wing Chun (easiest example is the 100/0 vs. 50/50 stance debate). Ip Man wasn't avowed to maintain himself separate from the general public and his lineage is already starting to spread and disagree with each other. If this is the case for someone that taught publicly, I would expect that during a time of persecution and rebellion (in addition to clan/race ties – for example Hakka tend to be a closed social group – AND the mixture of flavors of Wing Chun) information was not available to all and, as different things were taught at different times, the overall body of knowledge changed over time and resulted in different results today.

Jeremy R.

Zhuge Liang

10-26-2003, 03:43 PM

Hi Jeremy,

What is meant by "operates so differently"? I'm not clear on your question so I can't answer.

I mean form, structure, theory, etc. You name it.

I'd like to know on what you are making your statement in regards to the lineage you listed as being "closer to each other than they are to HFY" - In my experience, HFY is closer to Yip Man than Yip Man is to Yik Kam; HFY is closer to Pan Nam than Pan Nam is to Yip Man. You're statement is open to debate.

It's based on information on the internet, books, heresay, but most of all, personal experience. I've met Hendrik and have touched his hands, so that gives me a small amount of indication of the "engine" that drives his Yik Kam Wing Chun. I've also studied with Eddie Chong for about a year so I have some idea of what Pan Nam Wing Chun is like. Finally, I've visited Gee sifu in San Francisco and had a brief intro. It was unfortunate that I did not get a "feel" of HFYWCK, but it was readily apparent from what I've been exposed to (including the articles on the VTM, and what I've read of the HFY book) that the HFY system is more different than the mentioned lineages than they are to each other. I believe that Rene and Jim have also made the same observations.

As for an example of teaching diverging over time, look at the Ip Man lineage - there are approximately three 'generations' of students in Hong Kong and a fourth in China (I put 'generations' in quotes as all these students were directly Ip Man but learned during different times/places). Comparing these groups the teachings are often quite different - and that's only one generation of students. The students two layers removed from Ip Man are already starting to differ in their approach to Wing Chun (easiest example is the 100/0 vs. 50/50 stance debate).

Hmmm, I don;t think this example will work. First of all, we are talking about time across at least three generations. Hung Gun Biu and Wong Wah Bo were the same generation (someone correct me if I'm wrong). Secondly, despite the changes the Yip Man lineages, we are STILL closer to each other than to HFY. If we take Sum Nung, Yik Kam, Pan Nam, and Pien Sun into account, then it extends almost back to the Red Boats and we are still closer to each other than to HFYWCK.

now you say that there were parallel systems of WCK during Hung Gun Biu's generation. Fine, I buy that. But it seems to me more likely that HFY and our Wing Chun were parallel, rather than one being a derivative of the other, as Savi hypothesized. If one were to attempt to make that case, that person would need to account for the differences and how those differences were evolved.

Regards,
Alan

KPM

10-26-2003, 04:45 PM

Hi Savi!

You wrote:
I know you are asking Jeremy for an answer, but in the meantime I think this might provide some more information on the swords to digest before he answers. Right now I am looking for information on the Gwan (pole) for you as I know I have read background information on it before.

http://home.vtmuseum.org/articles/meng/butterflyknives.php

---Thanks for the link. I have read that article in the past. Good article, but it still does not explain why one would choose to train an Army in the use of the double knives when you could be teaching them to use the standard battlefield weapons of the day such as the darn dao. Double knives for revolutionaries carrying a concealed weapon in narrow streets and tight quarters. That's what's plausible to me. Double knives for fighting in a battlefield melee. That just seems less plausible to me.

You noted:
My understanding is that the anti-qing fighters did not exclusively use HFY as their only system of combat on the field - nor did they even know they were using HFYWCK. Based on what I understand, the name HFYWCK was only known to insiders - high level revolutionaries. A more general name was given to them, at this point though I do not know what they called it. But for certain I do know that the full name HFYWCK was only known by inside circles.

----No problem. My point was that one would think there would still be martial arts in the area with a distinctive "HFY flavor", regardless of what they were called. We just don't seem to see this prior to the Red Boat era. So where did all the guys that were trained for this army go?

You suggested:
Might I suggest you reread chapter 5 of the book? Page 76. Also what separates HFY from the other battlefield combat systems of the time was its foundation on the WC Formula. if you get a chance to reread this chapter, I hope it will clear up the picture more for you.

---OK. I took your advice and went back over that chapter. So the common troups may not have known the indepth theories of HFY. But they still would have been practicing something that LOOKED like HFY! ONe would expect that this martial "DNA" would have been left behind in provincial styles of the area prior to the Red Boat era. Again, we don't seem to see anything like that.

You asked:
Hopefully I won't get attacked for this, but have you ever considered that the WC brought to the Hung Suen (Red Boats) are the remnants you are looking for?

---Possibly. But the point has been that we don't see any of these remnants of "HFY DNA" PRIOR to the Red Boats. No one has shown any evidence so far that WCK was not developed solely by the Red Boat generation. Sure, nothing develops in a vacuum and there were probably several "seed" arts that contributed......possibly White Crane, possibly Southern Shaolin derived arts, etc. But again, the idea I am having problems with is that HFY was the hand to hand combat method of an entire army trained to fight against the Qing. If it was, one would think we would be able to find remnants of it prior to the Red Boat generation. On the scale of less plausible and more plausible, this ranks kind of low in my opinion.

Keith

Savi

10-26-2003, 05:01 PM

I am short on time here Keith, but to offer another perspective, I think this conversation must then to a comparison of similarities between many different WC lineages alongside HFY which I am not in a position to do being that I only have trained the WC in the Yip Man/Moy Yat family and HFY family. That is unless you would like to follow/consider Sisuk Jeremy's posts instead, which is cool too.

Perhaps later today or sometime this coming week I can put together something, but it would only be based on my own experiences and understanding.

As it stands, I see practically everything I have learned in Yip Man/Moy Yat WC contained within what I have learned thus far in the SNT level of HFY (things that 'resemble' and things that are nearly identical between the two). From the YJKYM stance to the Jong Sau to the 3 pillars (Tan, Bong, Fuk) to how Paak Sau is trained not to mention that both systems make use of the dummy, weapons and Chi Sau and even energy training. Even Chi Sim makes use of the dummy, weapons and (in parallel to HFY) Kiu Sau.

Just offering some off the top of my head observations before I go, but from my position I can see the connection. Sorry to leave the discussion today. I'll check back later.

KPM

10-26-2003, 05:20 PM

Hi Jeremy!

You wrote:
Look at the two weapons of Wing Chun: double knife and pole. Based on these two weapons, a practitioner can be given a technical understanding of many different types of weapons in a short period of time.

---The book talks about the two-track method of teaching....SNT and SLT. The "trainers" learned the in-depth theories of the system and the "common troups" learned only what they needed to know for survival on the battlefield. I can see how the trainers may have used the pole as the conceptional representative of all long weapons and the knives as the conceptional representative of all short weapons. But even this is stretching my sense of "plausibility" if we consider that these people were concerned about serious battlefield engagements. But based on the two-track approach, it would seem contradictory to say that the common troops were taught weapons in this fashion. If they were shown only what they needed to know to survive, it would seem to me they would have been taught the spear or the darn dao directly, not the long pole and the double knives.

you noted:
As for the origins of the pole - the Spear was considered the king of the battlefield in ancient times. However, you can't bring a spear into the temple.

---But these guys weren't monks. The were soldiers in a revolutionary army according to the HFY history. They wouldn't care whether you could take the weapon into a temple! They'd be worried about surviving on the battlefield! I'd rather have a spear than a pole on the battlefield any day!

You said:
I think you're missing the context - an army of anti-revolutionaries trying to maintain secrecy. It seems to me that it would be intuitively obvious that such an army wouldn't be comprised of 100,000s of people - it would be a much smaller scale - in the 1000s.

---No, I never assumed huge numbers. An army in the 1000s is quite big enough to generate my questions and doubts. Again, where did they all go? We had thousands of people practicing HFY prior to the Red Boat era and yet they left no trace of their martial art behind? No HFY "DNA" in local village martial arts in the areas where the army operated, or home villages that the soldiers returned to when things quited down?

You asked:
I think that is open to debate - what constitutes remnants or suggestions of HFY?

---Debate? Its simple! The book says that HFY as taught today is the same martial art taught to the revolutionary army. It seems to me that members of that army in later years would have continued to practice and even teach what they had learned. So there should be "remnants"....martial arts that resemble modern HFY in more than just body mechanics common to other southern styles of Kung Fu. Sure, by now they would have likely evolved and changed quite a bit. But they should still be recognizable as WCK. Yet we don't find any evidence of strongly "WCK-like" martial arts prior to the Red Boat era.

You commented:
I recently had an opportunity to speak with an Ng Jou (Five Ancestor) practitioner and in their Chi Sau they make use of a body structure that could be classified as Yin Line but he wasn't conscious of why he placed his elbows where he did - he just knew that it was better than other places through 10 years of hard training. His Sifu didn't make reference of Yin Lines either - but mentioned about placement of the elbow based on experience over time.

---With all due respect, I place my elbows on the "yin line" as well. I just never had anyone put a name to it before. It comes about by human biomechanics, not some secret theory.

I didn't see anything in "Mastering Kung Fu" to support the theory of WCK as military training for an army as opposed to WCK as self-defense training for a small rebel group.

Look over the context I outlined above and let me know what you think.

----I still have to look at this from the perspective of "more plausible" and "less plausible." The context you have provided still doesn't add up to being more plausible than the idea that WCK developed almost entirely on the Red Boats from several different influences, rather than existing in secret for 100's of years prior. That WCK was the hand to hand self-defense method of a small number of anti-Qing revolutionaries, rather than the hand to hand combat method of an army. That the pole and double knives were adopted out of expediency and need, rather than being the prototypes for all battlefield weapons. I'm sorry, but I just still do not see HFY's version of WCK history to be very plausible. More independant supporting evidence is needed.

Keith

KPM

10-26-2003, 05:44 PM

Hi Savi!

You wrote:
As it stands, I see practically everything I have learned in Yip Man/Moy Yat WC contained within what I have learned thus far in the SNT level of HFY (things that 'resemble' and things that are nearly identical between the two). From the YJKYM stance to the Jong Sau to the 3 pillars (Tan, Bong, Fuk) to how Paak Sau is trained not to mention that both systems make use of the dummy, weapons and Chi Sau and even energy training. Even Chi Sim makes use of the dummy, weapons and (in parallel to HFY) Kiu Sau.
Just offering some off the top of my head observations before I go, but from my position I can see the connection. Sorry to leave the discussion today. I'll check back later.

----Yes. I see a connection as well. But there may be a different way to explain this connection. I mean no dispect here, but just ask you to consider for a moment some points with an open mind.
I could very well be wrong and out of place. But please consider:

1. Prior to the appearance of HFY, the only WCK lineages that included the Luk Sao platform for Chi Sao were that of Yeun Kay Shan and Yip Man. Knowing that the two men were friends and trained together, this has lead many of us to conclude that this particular aspect of WCK training was developed by them.

2. Prior to the appearance of HFY, the only WCK lineage that included Dan Chi Sao was YMWCK. YKSWCK does not. This has lead many of us to conclude that Yip Man developed this mode of training as a way to prepare beginning students for Luk Sao.

3. It is widely accepted that Yip Man's later students developed Chi Gerk based upon the concepts of Chi Sao. Yip Man did not teach Chi Gerk.

4. It is also widely accepted that Yip Man himself coined the term "bart Jam dao" for the double knives.

One has to wonder how they became a part of the HFY curriculum. I point this out only to show that there may be another explanation for all the connections that you see. Then again, maybe it all predated Yip Man and he somehow learned HFY? If so, its strange how he chose not to use the vast majority of what "Mastering Kung Fu" notes is a far superior system to his "Popular" WCK. Anyway, just a thought. I hope that you and Jeremy do not take offense at these suggestions. I'll just return to my theme: when one considers "more plausible" and "less plausible"......................

Keith

Mckind13

10-26-2003, 11:38 PM

This is a really great dialogue guys.

Thanks for keeping it on the list and clean!

I like the posts and while I do not agree I do like the openness of your statements and opinions.

David

Train

10-27-2003, 02:36 AM

KPM,
you keep saying..... "this has lead many of us to conclude"
Who's us?? :) Actually the 5 Ancester kung fu has there form of chi sau too. So, should we conclude that Yip Man took it from them? Tai chi has something like that too. So, should we conclude that tai chi is related to WCK? Since The VTM is actually doing research on WCK (traveling and asking famous WC Sifus about what they know). Maybe is best asking them what they came up with about the chi sau history.
What do y'alls think?

KPM

10-27-2003, 03:42 AM

Hi Train!

You wrote:
you keep saying..... "this has lead many of us to conclude"
Who's us?? :)

---Those of us that have gone over this in the past either here or on the WCML. I couldn't name names, but in general its the guys that have had an active interest in WCK history for quite awhile now.

Actually the 5 Ancester kung fu has there form of chi sau too. So, should we conclude that Yip Man took it from them? Tai chi has something like that too. So, should we conclude that tai chi is related to WCK? Since The VTM is actually doing research on WCK (traveling and asking famous WC Sifus about what they know). Maybe is best asking them what they came up with about the chi sau history.

---Sure, many styles have a form of contact reflex drill known as chi sao. But I was referring specificially to the Luk Sao platform for chi sao.

Keith

reneritchie

10-27-2003, 08:23 AM

Keith,

Luk Sao is a valid point, and there are others (gone over ad nauseum infinitum so I won't retread here). I don't know if HFY uses the term Dan Chi Sao to mean the specific drill Yip Man used the term for (they might, or they might mean some other single-bridge drill, or just anything with the single bridge whatsoever). Gee sifu also said during the Dayton Friendship Seminar that he adopted Yip Man terminology to make his system more explainable to the vast majority of WCK people who came from that background.

Mckind13

10-27-2003, 08:30 AM

Train/ KPM

Good points and you are both raising some good questions.

On the point of 5 Ancestor fist having Poon Sau /Luk Sao style Chi Sau:
Is it possible this is a shared motion from a ancestry such as White Crane?

If we could track the arts that use similar method of rolling and sticking as say YKS, YM and some other more established systems of Wing Chun, where would it lead.

I have studied neither White Crane nor 5 AF so cannot say.

But it could be an interesting study.

David

Phenix

10-27-2003, 09:09 AM

Great clean discussion!

Hung Gun Biu and Wong Wah Bo were the same generation (someone correct me if I'm wrong). -----

From writtern history which is certain,

1, We know, Hung Gun doesn't equal with Wong Wah Bo who is the elite of the opera group.

2, We know, Hung Gun exist because Lee Man-Mau and Opera actors... run out of opera costume and decided to use red bandana for the rapid growing new commers.

Thus,
it is certain that Hung Gun is a symbolized of later joiners to the Opera Uprising.

And, until we can find writting evidents or a cross field evidents that Hung Gun Biu is not a common name and who is he what is his art. We are too quick to place a conclusion of he is equal to Wong wah po generation.

now you say that there were parallel systems of WCK during Hung Gun Biu's generation. Fine, I buy that. But it seems to me more likely that HFY and our Wing Chun were parallel, rather than one being a derivative of the other, as Savi hypothesized. -----

Perhaps there were parallel systems which is distance related to the art of our opera ancestor's art.

Since there were various group in the Opera at the Opera time. And , later there were non opera people came and Join the Hung Gan movement of the Opera Group.

And, There is also equal posibilities. That,

Perhaps, it is a derivation of our Opera ancestors art due to new people joining the Hung Gan, thus the opera ancestors teaches them a crash course version for battle fighting only?

IMHO, Hung Gan Biu and Ng Mui are two nick names. The different is we know Hung Gan is a creation of our opera ancestors and Ng Mui we can find traces of signature to White Crane of Fujian --- Sam Dim Ng Mui Fa or three points Five Plum flower, Inch Jing Joing Power. As for Hung Gan Biu, we have to collect more evidents.

yuanfen

10-27-2003, 09:20 AM

Rene sez:

Gee sifu also said during the Dayton Friendship Seminar that he adopted Yip Man terminology to make his system more explainable to the vast majority of WCK people who came from that background.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lots of piggy backing on Ip Man legacy.

The dan chi sao, its necessary relationship to luk and lop - the variations and applications are part of Ip Man's legacy- passing what he learned with his stamp on it.
There are other significant Ip man markers which illustrate the problems of so called early history of wing chun.
Double swords in the north and double knives in the south are well known in CMA -- but the preference for some kinds of knives and the term and meaning "bot jam do" is uniquely Ip Man.

Ip Man wing chun also has very elaborate footwork in the jong, in the do and in the kwan..

One of the problems I see is with folks claiming that they know wing chun and their xyz system is older and better- is that they dont know enough about Ip Man wing chun. Sure there are different variations of Ip Man wing chun--- some of the differences shows it's richness. Of course there are other reasons and broken telephones. All Ip Man lines have bits and pieces of Ip Man .So understanding Ip Man wing chun involves an elaborate understanding across Ip man lines.
To deal with history one has to have a considerable understanding of what is being traced- simply using or adopting a name "wing chun"- is an empty label.

One can have a lineage story no matter how elaborate or short and it can help provide organization cohesion- doesn't make it history.

duende

10-27-2003, 10:00 AM

Alex

Joy,

I think it would help if you started looking at Yip Man as being just a part of the WC universe, and not it's center. I remember there once being an argument that Yip Man created Dan Chi Sau.. HA HA... Give me a break... What other WC attribute's are Hung Suen WC stealing from Hong Kong? Kiu Sau??? Chi Kiu??? Oh wait.... you don't have those.

It appears to me that it is our theory that is making it's way out into other WC schools. Are you teaching six gates five lines yet??? Who's piggy backing on who??

And... you say we don't know enough about Yip Man huh??? We have many former Yip Man students and Master's in my kwoon alone. I won't even go into the former Yip Man schools. I myself had the pleasant experience of studying under Sifu Augustine Fong in the eighties in Tucson at his kwoon on Craycroft St.

reneritchie

10-27-2003, 10:24 AM

David,

I don't believe Ng Jo or Weng Chun Bak Hok have 'luk sao' type Chi Sao, but some branches do have a type of Chi Sao still found in Sum Nung, Gulao (Koo Lo), and Cho Ga WCK. When I asked at the Friendship Seminar, I was told HFY did not use that type of platform.

Alex,

As moderator of the WCML, I can Robert Chu did have some problems with some members, but then so did *many* HFY people, including Benny. Hey, I've even had my share 8). Perhaps its best for everyone to avoid pointing fingers and all just try our best now.

Hendrik,

I believe I've seen a 'Biu' (I won't mention the full name here but I think you've seen it to) listed as one of the Opera Actors who knew WCK. If he had been one of the common folks who later joined the troops, the nickname could have morphed or been confused into 'Hung Gan' Biu.

Joy,

You raise some good points, and there was piggybacking in many directions, just some not as well known, but the markers are there if you know what to look for. It's one of the best ways to trace a system.

(And if you actually map out the known changes in Sum Nung, Yip Man, and some other branches, the results seem to confirm what the system probably looked like back in Wong Wah-Bo's time--somewhere in the middle, but not too different from either).

yuanfen

10-27-2003, 10:30 AM

Duende addressing Joy sez:
Give me a break... What other WC attribute's are Hung Suen WC stealing from Hong Kong?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Break given- I said nothing about Hung Suen!!!

reneritchie

10-27-2003, 10:44 AM

Savi, Alex,

Allow me to plea the same no-attackiness, but this is something that's always confused me:

Hopefully I won't get attacked for this, but have you ever considered that the WC brought to the Hung Suen (Red Boats) are the remnants you are looking for?

See, when I was introduced to HFY, the system was being called Hung Suen (Red Junk) WCK, and claimed to be the system passed down on the Red Junk. Now, however, it's been suggested (directly or otherwise) that the Red Junk itself received only partial transmission.

If that was the case, why would HFY have been using the specific name Hung Suen WCK (they could easily have been using the generic WCK, local Siguan WCK, or anything).

If Hung Suen WCK was less then, inferior to, not as good as, less complete, etc., why choose it as your name, a name that at least some are still using, as per Alex?

What other WC attribute's are Hung Suen WC stealing from Hong Kong?

Phenix

10-27-2003, 10:58 AM

Originally posted by reneritchie

Hendrik,

I believe I've seen a 'Biu' (I won't mention the full name here but I think you've seen it to) listed as one of the Opera Actors who knew WCK.

If he had been one of the common folks who later joined the troops, the nickname could have morphed or been confused into 'Hung Gan' Biu.

.

Rene,

Sure, there is a " Biu. " . and sure possible.

Now, we know that the opera ancestors created Hung Gan.

IMHO, logically, Red Banana ritual /ceremony is to initiation for the later joiners.

Since Wong wah boh, Leong Yee Dai, Yik Kam.... were all siheng dai for long. So, do they have to go throught those Red Bandana ritual/ceremony to learn WCK?

-------------------------------------------------------------

Just for fun :

:D
And, Wong Wah Bo becomes Hung Gam BO. With evidents. (jking)

http://www.hkmdb.com/db/movies/view.mhtml?id=6324&display_set=eng

Leong Yee Dai will tell Wong Wah po as in the above movie, What ? ritual for learning WCK? come on you are not my sifu. I don't need to learn from you, your elephan WCK, sorry Brother Wong. :D While Wong Complain about Leong's femine WCK. :D )

reneritchie

10-27-2003, 11:17 AM

Hendrik,

Since they began teaching after Yip MingChan's purge, I would guess it's more likely Wong et. al. already knew WCK at the time of the Red Turban rebellion. What do you think?

Also, for those who learned on the Junk, (Cho Shun, Fung Siu-Ching), it would make it probable they learned much before, unless these folks learned during the latter Eight Harmonies Company period.

Phenix

10-27-2003, 11:52 AM

Rene,

I see, there is a WCK which train by the Opera seniors such as Wong, Leong, Yik.....

And likely there is a an art for the Red Bandana, may be lead by one of the Opera folks.

As for the WCK of the Opera seniors, those are artists with culture and not Kill Bill type of people.

so, thier art is more subtle and advance, since they meet/excahnges with lots of different martial artists while they were travelling years/decade before the uprising era. Red boat were popolar since 1820's. As we can find, pieces of Kuen Kuit of White Crane, E12P, Medicine formulars, RX, from different part of China....... passed down from these people.

compare with Red Turban training which is IMHO more a Crash Couse since they don't have time. As written in the history, Starting at June 1854 and get into battle right away....

In addition,
Remember, those leaders in the Red Turban are the stories tellers, or movie director in these days.

May be Someone told the Red Bandana army about Shao LIn, about Ming, about the best Martial arts..... as it is a common practise to secure and boost spirit of the trops.

As you can also see the same tactic even in Boxer Revolution where some one told the followers that they can repel western gun's bullets.

You can see, I have basis on my comments above, as the following.

Evidentatlly,

1, Lee's uprising is using the Ming's court costumes before they run out and swith to Red Bandana. That using Ming's court costumes itself is a sign of Lee's strategy.

2, What did Lee and ect named thier country after they control certain places? Not Ming right? are they set up as a Buddhist country? .... Do they really loyal to Ming? Do they link to Shao Lin? Action tell the truth better then words.

So, There is lots of possibilities, there are lots of stories in the middle of the uprising. We are facing new historic data, evidents.... almost every years...

IMHO,
I rather take everyone's stories as it is with respect then push it to be the oldest or most original....

So,
IMHO, that is not that difficult to do in our democratic world today, right?

yuanfen

10-27-2003, 12:12 PM

Duende asks{

Are you teaching six gates five lines yet???
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

FWIW- Ip Man lines have used the concept of 6 gates for very long time-- even Y. Lee.BL's little green book had diagrams of gates.

Re- the five lines- there was a discussion some time ago to its similarity to TWC approach to the subject. I dont think we need to revisit that one.

duende

10-27-2003, 12:27 PM

[/QUOTE]

See, when I was introduced to HFY, the system was being called Hung Suen (Red Junk) WCK, and claimed to be the system passed down on the Red Junk. Now, however, it's been suggested (directly or otherwise) that the Red Junk itself received only partial transmission.

If that was the case, why would HFY have been using the specific name Hung Suen WCK (they could easily have been using the generic WCK, local Siguan WCK, or anything).

If Hung Suen WCK was less then, inferior to, not as good as, less complete, etc., why choose it as your name, a name that at least some are still using, as per Alex?

[/B][/QUOTE]

Rene,

It is my understanding that Hung Suen is simply a blanket term/name used by WC lineages that come directly from mainland China. Not via Hong Kong. That is how I meant it's use anyways.

Pesonally, I don't really care about inferior this, superior that. We used the term back then simply because of it's generic nature that allowed us to delineate ourselves from the more popular WC's in SF, and still remain private about our HFY ancestry.

simple as that...

Alex

Phenix

10-27-2003, 12:41 PM

Rene,

In addition, Sometimes, I see it is similar to those Chinese Soap Opera which has the topic of a big rich family. After father die, sons are fighting for inheritance, people fighting for authority, people fighting for .... Those happen in old time China.

I guess, life is opera and opera is life. Lee Man-Mau rule his kingdom with what he learns from the Opera. And, As we can see from the History, he is a good king. That we have to respect him.

thirdperson

10-27-2003, 12:43 PM

I have no vested interest in seeing this discussion/debate favor one side or the other, but the thread has made for some interesting reading.

I am just trying to get the positions clear, are the non-HFY people simply asking for the research in a HFY book to be documented and presented so that it may be confirmed (or disproved)? Is the research already presented and being disagreed with (or disproved)? What exactly is the debate here?

It seems like some of the HFY people present their case, and others refuse to present their case because they feel it's rude for you to ask, or you are asking in a rude manner.

It seems like some non-HFY people are being rude, but considering that they can't get the answers they are looking for, perhaps this is just out of frustration? Did this dispute originate as a desire to see research and evidence that went unfulfilled, or did it originate as a defensive/reflexive situation?

Are people past waiting for whatever proof they're after, and just claiming that HFY is completely fabricated, or what? What is being alleged?

It seems like there is a rift, with some people on both sides trying to have a discussion, so that the rift can be removed, and also people on both sides that spend a great amount of effort on the defense, rather than simply presenting their case.

Is it a pride issue? A money issue? Neither or either? Would being more direct about this discussion make it more hostile, or would it simply speed up the resolution of this dispute?

I'm sorry I don't know a lot about whatever the problem is, I don't have what either side of you is needing, or I would try to resolve it. I hate to ask you to backtrack, but would anybody (from either side of this) care to answer some of the general questions from above? Perhaps then I could contribute an unbiased opinion that you could take at whatever value you wished.

I'm not a Master or anything like that, and I'm not trying to pass judgement on anyone for kicks. You can ignore my questions or answer them, I won't take offense either way.

duende

10-27-2003, 01:04 PM

IMHO Rene and Hendrik,

you both are going off on a tangent soley based on your own assumptions. That's fine and all, but it would be nice to have some actual evidence to support the conclusions you are drawing. Not just your humble opinion.

Just like I would like once again to see this White Crane->WC book by Hendrik.

Savi's statements come directly from the evidence gathered by the VTM.

I am not a member of the museum, but I am impressed by all the profound effort put out by Benny Meng and his VTM companions. Which included countless research trips throughout China and the interviewing of many many many WC masters from all over the world. As you know much of his research has been published, but be advised that there is much much more to come.

Personally, I encourage all research. I just think it's outright dumb to discount all the research done by the VTM. Especially when you are researching the very thing they set out to do.

reneritchie

10-27-2003, 01:28 PM

Hi Alex,

you both are going off on a tangent soley based on your own assumptions. That's fine and all, but it would be nice to have some actual evidence for the conclusions you are drawing.

That's exactly how many different people, from many different backgrounds, lineages, experiences, and points of view feel about the VTM and their conjectures on WCK history (which thusfar have not had any supporting evidence presented, only alluded to).

Hendrik, FWIW, may be conjecturing as well, but he (and I), are basing it on publically available historical articles, books, and other works, which anyone and everyone (yourself included) can go and verify on your own. If the same would be done for the VTM's conjectures, it would be wonderful.

but I am impressed by all the profound effort put out by Benny Meng and his VTM companions

As am I, and I am just as impressed by the profound effort put forth by Hendrik, who began researching WCK history before myself (or anyone in the VTM) had begun studying the art. I would still like to see 'evidence' from the VTM, as much as I would like to see further 'evidence' from Hendrik, to reflect and properly do justice to all the effort that's been put in.

Personally, I encourage all research. I just think it's outright dumb to discount all the research done by the VTM. Especially when you are researching the very thing they set out to do.

I agree completely. In fact, I think its important that different and disagreeing perspectives are given voice. However, just as you think its outright dumb to discount all the research done by the VTM, I think its just as unthinkable for others to discount Hendrik's work, or the work of others (even my own small efforts), which seems too often to be the case here.

Thirdperson,

I was one of the very few people right there at the beginning (HFY, as Hung Suen, was first publically presented in a book I co-authored, and discussed online in a group I co-moderate). The VTM has presented a lot of conclusions, some very strongly worded, but have not presented anything specific to back up these conclusions. You are right on both counts that there is frustration from others at being told, in so many words, they are doing 'inferior' WCK without any 'proof' being provided, and on the part of the VTM in the face of the response generated. Everyone becomes agressive and defensive, and communication breaks down (sometimes in the extreme).

I do not believe money is a large factor (how many people have become wealthy off WCK?), but ego and face play their part. One of the problems, IMHO, is that the VTM comes from a background where they were one of the largest families of the largest branch in WCK (Moy Yat/Yip Man) and were able to communicate in an assertive way that a small, fringe branch just can't do (as I experienced being part of a less known lineage).

The problem, at its root, is semantics. This is the same problem as Leung Ting had with his 'last closed door disciple', William Cheung had with his 'Traditional Wing Chun', and others have had over the years as well--People do not react well to claims that they are training an inferior, incomplete, or otherwise diluted/poluted for of Wing Chun Kuen (as traditional/modified, or authentic/modern, or shaolin/popular), especially when nothing is presented to back up these claims aside from, in so many words, 'we have the proof but we're not telling you'.

It's playground stuff. Who's daddy can beat up who else's daddy? But then many large, adult problems can be traced back to playgrounds.

Now, a hostile environment exists where non-HFY people feel they are being force fed cultish propaganda, and HFY people feel jealous, mentally-challenged, inexperienced internet people thrive on defamating them on chat groups. It's no win, all lose, and, sadly, seemingly not about to change very soon.

The solution, of course, the same solution I've advocated for years, publically and privately, to the main players on both sides, is simply:

1) For no one to claim to be better than anyone else, explicitly or implicitly, in public, as it is bad for the family at whole (makes us look as we are--inept in-fighters)
2) To never promote our own lineages or approaches at the expense of another (in fact, not to reference others at all in a comparitive manner--if you can't explain why you're good without trying to make someone else look bad, you have more work of your own to do before trying to write in public).
3) To apply the same standards evenly across the board (if Ng Mui-as-founder can be challenged maturely and professionally, then Cheung Ng-as-founder should be discusse-able in the same way).
4) To give newly emerging lineages breathing room and the time it takes to properly discuss and document themselves (if everytime a brand new student of one of these lineages comes online and is barraged with a million questions someone from Yip Man (most published lineage there is) couldn't answer, it only serves to alienate more and more people).

John Weiland

10-27-2003, 01:55 PM

Hi Alex,

Originally posted by duende

IMHO Rene and Hendrik,

Do you know what IMHO means? :D I don't buy the "H." You have no reason to be humble in expressing your opinion. You're entitled to express it. :)

you both are going off on a tangent soley based on your own assumptions. That's fine and all, but it would be nice to have some actual evidence to support the conclusions you are drawing. Not just your humble opinion.

Rene Ritchie and Hendrik Santo have been open and sharing about their historical sources and their conclusions. Hendrik especially is uncovering vast amounts of insights into Wing Chun origins based on extensive documented research into Cho family history, Chinese opera, Fujian White Crane---which he believes in the ancestral art of Wing Chun, and Chinese history. I'm not qualified as an historian, but on the face of it, Hendrik seems to be up front and honest with his knowledge and with the gaps that still exist in his studies, although those gaps seem to be closing. This latter reference to gaps may just be my misunderstanding of Hendrik's decision to parse out his findings in easy to digest doses.

Just like I would like once again to see this White Crane->WC book.

Hendrik has cited numerous books in his research. His own final effort may be a living book online, if I understand his recent post.

Savi's statements come directly from the evidence gathered by the VTM.

Many of us non-partisan observers do not agree with your use of the word evidence for what the VTM has gathered. I don't presume that it is a deliberate attempt to mislead, but it does not have the quality of evidence---more of a process of a predetermined mind-set that sees "proof" in random facts and opinions.

I am not a member of the museum, but I am impressed by all the profound effort put out by Benny Meng and his VTM companions. Which included countless research trips throughout China and the interviewing of many many many WC masters from all over the world. As you know much of his research has been published, but be advised that there is much much more to come.

Do these countless trips throughout China compare with Hendrik Santo's life and travels and travails in the region? He was in the unique position of being the right person in the right place at the right time to seek and understand and synthesize the many threads that have been woven into today's Wing Chun.

Personally, I encourage all research. I just think it's outright dumb to discount all the research done by the VTM. Especially when you are researching the very thing they set out to do.
No one has discounted the research. It is the lack of supporting documentation that has been discounted. Instead of attacking Hendrik and Rene, the VTM would do well to draw upon them as independent analysts of what's been gathered for their imprimatur on historical methods.

BTW, I was not a part of the WCML, so I do not understand the references to its discussions. People change and learn, so don't judge this discussion from what went before.

Regards,

thirdperson

10-27-2003, 02:13 PM

Thanks Rene, that cleared up some of the gaps in my understanding of the disagreements.

duende

10-27-2003, 03:05 PM

ThirdPerson,

I appreciate your post. Obviously there is an outright refusal to acknowledge the evidence presented by the VTM, as seen demonstrated by statements like this.

"I would still like to see 'evidence' from the VTM, as much as I would like to see further 'evidence' from Hendrik, to reflect and properly do justice to all the effort that's been put in."

Like I said before, I am not a member of the VTM. However, I still see no reason their published research evidence should be ignored. One has to only look in a number of magazine issues from the provider of this forum to find examples of evidence the VTM has released.

John Weiland

10-27-2003, 03:12 PM

Originally posted by duende
One has to only look in a number of magazine issues from the provider of this forum to find examples of evidence the VTM has released.
I couldn't have said it better.

passing_through

10-27-2003, 03:52 PM

why were the "standard" battlefield weapons of the day not taught?

Because the primary battlefield was not necessarily the “standard” battlefield to which you allude.

Why would you field an army on a conventional (for the day) battlefield with a pole rather than a spear or two short knives rather than a darn dao and shield or a kwan dao or any number of other actual battlefield weapons?

I think this the source of the confusion – what is meant by “army” and when/where does this army conduct its operations? Generally during Dynasty upheaval, when the ruling Dynasty starts to lose, they flee south. As the battles/conflict continue to the south, the resistance becomes less in the form of fielded soldiers/standing armies and more in the form of guerilla-type battles and city fighting. Given that these were the conditions during the latter stages of the 1600s, it is plausible that an army could be created that operated mostly in cities along the costal waterways.

But the book says that HFY was developed and used to train an entire ARMY to fight against the Qing. Nothing is said about it being limited to just a few small "cells."

There is nothing in the definition of the word army that suggests that a group of people cannot organize themselves into cells or cabals and not refer to themselves as an army.

I can see how the trainers may have used the pole as the conceptiual representative of all long weapons and the knives as the conceptional representative of all short weapons. But even this is stretching my sense of "plausibility" if we consider that these people were concerned about serious battlefield engagements.

And if you don’t consider these people were concerned with serious battlefield engagements? I assume by “serious battlefield engagements” you refer to conventional/symmetrical warfare (standing army vs. standing army) and not unconventional/asymmetrical warfare (standing army vs. non-standing army). In that regard, by removing the qualifier “serious battlefield engagements” – does the situation suggested now seem more plausible?

But based on the two-track approach, it would seem contradictory to say that the common troops were taught weapons in this fashion. If they were shown only what they needed to know to survive, it would seem to me they would have been taught the spear or the darn dao directly, not the long pole and the double knives.

The pole and double-knives in combination create a matrix of all possible hand-to-hand weapon systems, save flexible and thrown. With this knowledge base, trainers/teachers could give a group of soldiers practical knowledge and skill in a relatively short period of time. Also, bear in mind that the warfare was not necessarily in open fields and poles/knives were more appropriate as you suggest elsewhere.

But these guys weren't monks. The were soldiers in a revolutionary army according to the HFY history. They wouldn't care whether you could take the weapon into a temple!
Soldiers being taught a system developed within the Southern Shaolin Temple through a synthesis of Shaolin and Ming knowledge. It is proposed that the art was created in the context of a Buddhist Temple (Southern Shaolin Temple) with input from the Ming military. In order to “fit the part” it is necessary to blend in with the surroundings. Monks training with spears would call unnecessary attention to their activities in regards to developing a new system.

HFY prior to the Red Boat era and yet they left no trace of their martial art behind? No HFY "DNA" in local village martial arts in the areas where the army operated, or home villages that the soldiers returned to when things quited down?

The book says that HFY as taught today is the same martial art taught to the revolutionary army.

Here’s another source of confusion. The soldiers were taught what was needed – not necessarily all the HFY body mechanics, just enough to ‘get the job done’. With that in mind, and given the timeframe of all this activity, it is possible that many of the southern “family” systems were the result of people developing/training in the revolutionary armies and then continuing the training when they returned to civilian life. As for HFY DNA in local systems - that also remains to be seen – the family styles need to be researched and documented to a greater extent that current. As for these systems being more or less “WCK-like” – that remains to be seen as well. Research in China isn’t so easy as you just pop in, ask a few pointed questions, get some pictures of the masters and off you go. There’s still a very active martial arts culture and certain topics are off limits to outsiders. Given that context, information is slow to accumulate – and many people still play ‘close to the chest’ doing cross family comparisons isn’t as easy as doing research here in the States.

With all due respect, I place my elbows on the "yin line" as well. I just never had anyone put a name to it before. It comes about by human biomechanics, not some secret theory.

The Ng Jou practitioner made use of something that took 10 years to figure out. Given enough time and energy, I could figure out the 11 herbs and spices of KFC – or be given the recipe and save all that time and effort – or go watch the chiefs prepare their spices and try to steal what I see. All of these occurred in the kung fu world of the past. However, trying to figure things out on my own vs. having the recipe from the start changes not only what I do but my understanding of what I do. With a clear understanding, I can teach/communicate clearly. Without a clear understanding, I can only teach a ‘best guess’ and my students are going to guess their best, too.

Going back to the history, the teachers were like engineers – they knew what they were doing and had the technology to analyze the machine to rebuild it. The students were like technicians – they could do the job but didn’t know why the machine worked the way it did.

WCK was the hand to hand self-defense method of a large number of anti-Qing revolutionaries, the hand to hand combat method of an army that operated in secret fighting non-conventional warfare.

more plausible?

the pole and double knives were adopted out of expediency and need, rather than being the prototypes for all battlefield weapons. [b]

Actually, I’m suggesting just the opposite: The pole and double-knife are the summation of the battlefield weapons, rather than the prototypes. With an understanding of the pole and double-knife, all battlefield weapons can be understood. Going the other way, you’d have to learn all the battlefield weapons in order to understand the pole and double-knife. And again, the trainer had to understand what he was doing – the soldier just had to know what to do. That’s too different levels of information, creating two different skill sets.

[b]the only WCK lineage that included Dan Chi Sao was YMWCK

Chi Sim also makes use of single hand reactional training, much like Dan Chi Sau.

Yip Man's later students developed Chi Gerk based upon the concepts of Chi Sao. Yip Man did not teach Chi Gerk.[b]
Chi Sim also makes use of a leg training exercise much like Chi Geuk.

[b]there may be another explanation for all the connections that you see. Then again, maybe it all predated Yip Man and he somehow learned HFY?

Then again, maybe Ip Man stole concepts/training from the Chi Sim lineage at the Daai Duk Lan. No flames, just throwing that out there as something plausable.

Then again, maybe Ip Man had contact with practitioners and teachers of a wide variety of southern styles and found comment elements in training methods that plugged into his understanding and approach to martial arts. And it is possible that the common elements originated from somewhere else and were dispersed across several types and in different timeframes.

Jeremy R.

duende

10-27-2003, 03:58 PM

Weiland,

You already stated you are not a qualified historian. The only qualifications you've demonstrated thus far is the exceptional ability to shame your lineage, get your posts deleted, and be the cause for the removal of portions of threads.

I suggest you learn how to control your energy (WC 101).

It's odd that everyone here has learned something from your mistakes except you.

anerlich

10-27-2003, 04:23 PM

Are you teaching six gates five lines yet???

Mate, I'm teaching eight gates seven lines. Some day the rest of the world will catch up. It's a numbers game and he with the most wins the race.

Stupid comment? Yeah but so is this d1ck measuring contest about who has the better history. I'm still (!) waiting on my book to get the HFY low down, While IMO Hendrik's hypotheses are no more than that. Rene co-wrote an excellent book for its time which, ammog other things, brought HFY and Gee Sifu to the attention of the world, and for that he is owed a debt.

Benny Meng wasn't exactly a saint towards his fellow historians while he was getting established, but has paid his dues and is worthy of respect.

the exceptional ability to shame your lineage, get your posts deleted, and be the cause for the removal of portions of threads.

"You have offended my family, and offended the Shaolin Temple ..."

Every time I think I'm making real progress on here, John shows me I'm still just an amateur. :(

;)

How many Wing Chunners to change a light bulb?

1 to get on the ladder and change the bulb and 999 to argue about who invented the ladder and who's technique of screwing in the bulb goes back to the Shaolin Temple.

Like Robert Plant said in "The Song Remains The Same", "Does anyone remember laughter?"

John Weiland

10-27-2003, 04:29 PM

Originally posted by duodenum
Weiland,

Hi.

You already stated you are not a qualified historian. The only qualifications you've demonstrated thus far is the exceptional ability to shame your lineage, get your posts deleted, and be the cause for the removal of portions of threads.

At least I can spell, unlike you.

I suggest you learn how to control your energy (WC 101).

You should take a cue from Savi. Even your insults are wide of the mark, like your history.

It's odd that everyone here has learned something from your mistakes except you.
I don't recall any mistakes. Care to be specific? Oh, that's right, you're obviously deficient in that ability.

Zhuge Liang

10-27-2003, 04:30 PM

Hi Jeremy,

Thanks for the continued discussion.

Here’s another source of confusion. The soldiers were taught what was needed – not necessarily all the HFY body mechanics, just enough to ‘get the job done’. With that in mind, and given the timeframe of all this activity, it is possible that many of the southern “family” systems were the result of people developing/training in the revolutionary armies and then continuing the training when they returned to civilian life.

I'm not sure I understand correcty. Are you suggesting that the southern family systems stem from HFY? That some of the Hung, Lau, Choy, Li, and Mok families, along with the smaller less famous families owe some of their gung fu to HFYWCK?

With all due respect, if Savi's HFYWCK->(Yip Man, Sum Nung, Pien Sun, Yik Kam) hypotheis was a bit of a stretch, I'm not sure I know how to classify the HFY->(Southern China family arts) hypothesis.

Yes, much remains to be seen, but factual data should drive the hypothesis, not the other way around. That is to say, something should lead you to make a hypothesis, instead of making a hypothesis and then hoping that something will come later.

But again, thanks for being open about the discussion. We may start a new trend yet! :)

Regards,
Alan

KPM

10-27-2003, 05:05 PM

Hi Jeremy!

You noted:
Because the primary battlefield was not necessarily the “standard” battlefield to which you allude.
Given that these were the conditions during the latter stages of the 1600s, it is plausible that an army could be created that operated mostly in cities along the costal waterways.
There is nothing in the definition of the word army that suggests that a group of people cannot organize themselves into cells or cabals and not refer to themselves as an army.

---Good points, and what you say makes things a bit more plausible. But that is not quite the impression I got from reading the book. All the references to an army and to "Battlefield" considerations certainly implied to me that open warfare in the "conventional" sense was intended. If not, then that could have been made more clear in the text. So it sounds like you are supporting the "WCK as hand to hand self defense training of a rebel group" and not the idea that it was used to train an army to meet Qing troops in open warfare. This is more in line with what I was proposing before, but again not the impression that I got from reading the book.

You wrote:
Soldiers being taught a system developed within the Southern Shaolin Temple through a synthesis of Shaolin and Ming knowledge. It is proposed that the art was created in the context of a Buddhist Temple (Southern Shaolin Temple) with input from the Ming military. In order to “fit the part” it is necessary to blend in with the surroundings. Monks training with spears would call unnecessary attention to their activities in regards to developing a new system.

---Sure, but by the time we are approaching the Red boat era (and the days of Hung Gun Biu) this was over 100 yrs in the past. The need to "maintain appearances" was over. Again, these guys were not monks at this point.

You said:
Here’s another source of confusion. The soldiers were taught what was needed – not necessarily all the HFY body mechanics, just enough to ‘get the job done’. With that in mind, and given the timeframe of all this activity, it is possible that many of the southern “family” systems were the result of people developing/training in the revolutionary armies and then continuing the training when they returned to civilian life.

---But wouldn't everyone have been taught the HFY "Formula" as a foundation for training? The book says that it is the "formula" that keeps HFY from being altered and changed from generation to generaion. So again, wouldn't all these thousands of soldiers have left behind martial arts that bore a strong resemblance to what we know as HFY today? We see remnants of other systems associated with the secret socieities. Why not HFY?

You stated:
WCK was the hand to hand self-defense method of a large number of anti-Qing revolutionaries, the hand to hand combat method of an army that operated in secret fighting non-conventional warfare.

more plausible?

---Yes. Thank you . :-) But again, not quite the impression that one gets from reading the book. But maybe that was just me taking things a little to literally.

You wrote:
Actually, I’m suggesting just the opposite: The pole and double-knife are the summation of the battlefield weapons, rather than the prototypes. With an understanding of the pole and double-knife, all battlefield weapons can be understood. Going the other way, you’d have to learn all the battlefield weapons in order to understand the pole and double-knife. And again, the trainer had to understand what he was doing – the soldier just had to know what to do. That’s too different levels of information, creating two different skill sets.

----OK. I'm still not quite sure I buy the idea of pole and double knives as representative of all battlefield weapons, but then if we are talking about gorilla warfare and not the open battlefield then that wouldn't really be necessary anyway.

Chi Sim also makes use of single hand reactional training, much like Dan Chi Sau.

--"much like" is not the same as "nearly identical." The Dan Chi sau illustrateed in the book looks "nearly identical" to the YMWCK version in appearance.

[b]Yip Man's later students developed Chi Gerk based upon the concepts of Chi Sao. Yip Man did not teach Chi Gerk.[b]
Chi Sim also makes use of a leg training exercise much like Chi Geuk.

---Again with the "much like."

Then again, maybe Ip Man stole concepts/training from the Chi Sim lineage at the Daai Duk Lan. No flames, just throwing that out there as something plausable.

---Good point! I hadn't thought of that. I've seen it suggested elsewhere that the YMWCK people got the idea for the suspended dummy from the DDL. The only problem with this theory is that YM seemed to be teaching these things in Foshan prior to going to Hong Kong. And Chi Sim doesn't use the Luk Sao platform for Chi sao. And YKSWCK was certainly doing Luk Sao prior to YM going to HK.

Then again, maybe Ip Man had contact with practitioners and teachers of a wide variety of southern styles and found comment elements in training methods that plugged into his understanding and approach to martial arts. And it is possible that the common elements originated from somewhere else and were dispersed across several types and in different timeframes.

---It would certainly appear that YM was more familiar with the other families of WCK than what he let on to his primary students in HK. So you are right in suggesting that it would be hard to say what kinds of things influenced the final form of his WCK. But it was still very much in the same mold as YKSWCK and PSWCK.
So it still seems far less plausible that YM somehow learned HFY than the alternative explanation for some of the previous points.

Thanks for the reply

Keith

KPM

10-27-2003, 05:15 PM

Duende wrote:
Like I said before, I am not a member of the VTM. However, I still see no reason their published research evidence should be ignored. One has to only look in a number of magazine issues from the provider of this forum to find examples of evidence the VTM has released.

---I recall an article on the discovery of what the Chinese authorities believe is the Southern Shaolin temple. It outlined the evidence for this belief. But as far as the HFY history, I recall only stories and theories. What "evidence" are you referring to?

Keith

Chango

10-27-2003, 06:15 PM

Keith,
exactly what are you looking for?

KPM wrote: I recall an article on the discovery of what the Chinese authorities believe is the Southern Shaolin temple. It outlined the evidence for this belief. But as far as the HFY history, I recall only stories and theories. What "evidence" are you referring to?

It seems to me that you will not ever be satisfied with what ever source or resource that would be presented. If that is the case I can't really see any point to continue this discussion. I have to then ask the question to you as a "criticle thinker" Is there comparible information avalible to suggest otherwise? I mean the VTM has only presented what findings they have. I mean when we look at evidence in each system. physically, (I mean beyond just simple techniques and shapes) Phylosophically, historically as in what is verified by other "none martial arts" Research institutions. For some it all becomes quite evident. But I guess if you decide not to except some things that are being pointed out. I guess things cannot move on from there. I can only say that I hope you find something to satisfy you hunger. If what is being presented does not fit your taste I can only say "I undersatnd" and we should just move on:)

Sifu Noaks

canglong

10-27-2003, 06:18 PM

Thirdperson,
"welcome to the party pal"....

originally posted by rene ritchie
Now, a hostile environment exists where non-HFY people feel they are being force fed cultish propaganda, and HFY people feel jealous, mentally-challenged, inexperienced internet people thrive on defamating them on chat groups. It's no win, all lose, and, sadly, seemingly not about to change very soon. "feel they are being force fed" not knowing the difference between having someone pinch your nose and shoving a untinsil down your throat as apposed to being offered a generous meal is problematic in and of itself from where I sit a a HFY member. Ill feelings and misguided perceptions of the VTM are causeing people to attack the messenger and disreguard the message at all cost. The HFY message is simple most of what we as practitioners learn about Hung Fa Yi comes directly from the system itself and yet so many people on this and other forums not knowing and unwilling to discover on their own the system doubt its history thus we can't even get to the heart of the matter which is the application to this beautiful science.
originally posted by rene ritchie
HFY people feel jealous, mentally-challenged, inexperienced internet people thrive on defamating them on chat groups. HFY people may not know these individuals asking questions personally so what we have to go by is their internet record of what they themselves have actually posted on other forums and if you yourself read some of the post reguarding HFY made by some of the very people on this forum you too might understand why we find some of their motives questionable. Rene, himself points out most of the people interested in the history of HFY couldn't answer 4 out of 5 questions about there own lineage with any amount of certainty but never the less they continue to wonder aloud about others. Seriously though this is just a little friendly sibling rivalry nothing more nothing less it's all wck and it's all good. I believe the only thing needed here is time, time for the dust to settle time for the chips to fall and time enough for reason to reign in "feelings".
originally posted by john weiland
don't recall any mistakes. Care to be specific? Oh, that's right, you're obviously deficient in that ability.
Your lack of recall would then make you the one that is deficient. To be more specific your distateful post that was removed serves as an example of how not to act in a public forum whether you are 8 or 80.

thirdperson

10-27-2003, 07:30 PM

duende and canglong: thanks for the welcome.

HFY members - I've seen some "it is possible that" remarks when some of your History is being explained. Have you, in fact, presented a theory that a certain history is merely possible?
Or, have you discovered a history but are witholding the evidence to support it? If so, why?
If you feel that neither of those characterizations can be considered fair, please present what you feel is HFY's position in this dispute.

To the others: I think Chango's question is very fair. "Exactly what would satisfy you?"

To Chango specifically - you said in your post:"It seems to me that you will not ever be satisfied with what ever source or resource that would be presented."
Has the proof been presented and rejected already? Was it good proof? If so, you may be right. If not, then it may not be fair to assume that someone would reject good proof. I may have missed what led to you making that remark, and I apologize if dwelling on it is an annoyance.

Again, I'm just asking the questions and trying to make it clear that I'm not on one side or the other. This situation seems like a very fertile ground for dispute to flourish. If a large group of families feel slighted by HFY's claim, then the claim will be scrutinized very meticulously, and that's to be expected. The claim should be well-supported. If someone comes along and claims they have uncovered yet a deeper and greater history than what the VTM has uncovered, the VTM will want to see the research. If the proof is not satisfactory, it will be at least temporarily discredited until a time when it can be reviewed after further evidence has come to light.

I don't fully understand why people feel as slighted as they do by the HFY history. If you are from a lineage that has publicly withstood the test of time, don't you feel that the reputation of your kung fu is something that cannot be devalued? Your kung fu has worked on the street, for a long time. It's not for sport. If their history is well-proven, either now, or in the future through further research, will you be giving up your particular Wing Chun lineage? None of the people here impress me as that sort.

Anyway, I will lay low and just observe from this point on. I hope an understanding is reached, and that everyone is happy with the eventual outcome. Maybe it will be resolved any moment, maybe after years, maybe never. Hopefully wisdom will outweigh insult, and progress will come.

Phenix

10-27-2003, 07:49 PM

Duende,

you both are going off on a tangent soley based on your own assumptions. That's fine and all, but it would be nice to have some actual evidence to support the conclusions you are drawing. Not just your humble opinion.---- D

It is not anyone's assumption.

FACT in the history of Qing Dynasty China:

Red Bandana is a creation of Lee Man-Mau and other Opera Actors. The reason of this creation is due to run out of Opera Costumes for the rapid growing supporters.

If you think Rene or me are both wrong,
As Rene suggested, Why don't you check into the publically available historical articles, books, and other works, which anyone and everyone (yourself included) can go and verify on your own. You can even go to the Chinese Gorvement to verify, how about that?

It is just a simple matter. Either Red Bandana is a creation of the Opera Actors or not. Keep it technical, attacking Rene or me is not going to change history.

Train

10-28-2003, 01:12 AM

Red Bandana is a creation of Lee Man-Mau and other Opera Actors. The reason of this creation is due to run out of Opera Costumes for the rapid growing supporters.

That could be one of the reasons why they wear them. But it also could symbolize something else. For example, the chinese moon cake festival. If you know the history behind it, you will understand why it is celebrated.

Chinese Gorvement to verify......Either Red Bandana is a creation of the Opera Actors or not.

That's not really the point though. I mean the chinese gov. only can give you a basic explanation of what really happened. Like our history books. Christopher Columbus founded america right?Don't think so.

What i mean is if you really wan tto know more about the red bandana, wouldn't you want to hear it from the source.

I am actually not to interested about what came first the red bandana or Lee Man-Mau becuase everything is speculation. We have to work with what we know and that is the Hung Guhn plays a role in WCK history and that's no doubt.

KPM

10-28-2003, 04:24 AM

Hi Chango!

You asked:
exactly what are you looking for?

---I am interested in WCK history and I am looking for theories that make some sense and have some plausiblity. Please go back and read my prior posts in this thread. Jeremy and I have "refined" the thesis in the HFY book a bit and it has come out a bit more "plausible." If no one looks at a theory critically and asks some hard questions, how will it get refined?

You wrote:
It seems to me that you will not ever be satisfied with what ever source or resource that would be presented.

---I wouldn't say that. Maybe I just have high standards. :-) Hendrik presented evidence for his theory of WCK coming from White Crane and Emie. He showed pictures of both and talked about some of the theories and kuen kit that resembled WCK and suggested that there is the possibility of a connection. That is evidence that I can accept and I can say "yea I see that and you may be right." But Hendrik did not go out and come up with a whole entire story and create a history complete and intact. He saw a connection, showed how it may fit , and put his theory out for consideration. The HFY family has not done that. Rather than saying "here is the opera history of Cheung Ng that shows his involvement in the secret socieities" and "look here they say his nickname was Tan Sau Ng, so we think there may be a connection with WCK." INstead the HFY book comes up with an entire history of Cheung Ng naming him as a HFY dignatary without showing any evidence to support that leap of logic. The book describes HFY as being used to train an army. This idea has logical flaws as well, which I was trying to work out with Jeremy with some success.

You asked:
I have to then ask the question to you as a "criticle thinker" Is there comparible information avalible to suggest otherwise?

---Huh? You want me to prove a negative? So if there is no evidence that the entire HFY history in wrong....that makes it automatically right? I'm sorry Chango, but that's not how things work in any academic setting I am familiar with. Should I go out and create my own WCK origins theory and then say that if you cannot prove it wrong that it must be right?

You state:
I mean the VTM has only presented what findings they have.

---With all due respect to the VTM and the amount of effort they have put in (which is a lot) I don't think your statement is not quite accurate. The factual evidence they have uncovered is not all that obvious. Perhaps it is woven into the HFY story in such a way that I did not recognize it properly. It would be helpful for the VTM to lay things out more explicitly. Like Hendrik has done, they could say "here is the factual evidence we have found from this source (named and referenced) and here is how we feel it fits with the HFY story. Show the evidence, show the proposed connection, and present the theory. Don't write out an entire history without footnotes and references and expect us "critical thinkers" to just take your word for it. I'd love to see the things the VTM has uncovered on its research trips. I'd love to see the pictures they have from other WCK lineages or read the transcripts of interviews with WCK masters in China. I'd love to see the things from the other museums that they speak of that has some connection to WCK. I'd love to see and get a feel for all the hard work the VTM has done. Instead I have a story in a book that has no footnotes, no references, and makes no attempt to show logical correlations between research evidence and the HFY version of history. So maybe I am picky and hard to please. But I doubt I am the only one that thinks this way.

Keith

reneritchie

10-28-2003, 08:20 AM

Jeremy's KFC analogy is hereby nominated as quote of the week! (With last week's, 'albeit, they may be womanizers', this is developing into the first signs of a streak!)

Thirdperson,

The problem with many WCK people and their conjectures is that they look at the wealth of information, and disinformation, and pick and choose that which will support their pre-defined belief.

What needs to be done is tabular rasa. Just look at the information without a vested interest or bias as to the outcome, and see how it fits together given the nature of the culture at the time.

The sad thing is, until time machines are invented, or the HK Sea-Scrolls are dug up, we may *never* know how WCK developed, and with explosives and the like, it *doesn't matter* what system is the 'best'. The argument is senseless on its face. (unless, unfortunately, people need it solely for its own sake).

duende

10-28-2003, 08:54 AM

Hendrik,

I wasn't attacking you. I was merely pointing out how your's and Rene's last few posts had drifted off into conjecture land, which Rene didn't take offence to and in fact fully admitted.

FWIW, it's easy to recite quotes and offer evidence from books. It's actually going out into the field to find and document your own evidence that's hard.

BTW, this is not an attack either, just want to make that clear before the virtual commandos come swarming in.

R Loewenhagen

10-28-2003, 10:07 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by reneritchie
[B]Keith,

"Do you think it is possible for a martial art particular to the secret societies that has been hidden from the public (but used to train an army to fight in rebellion against the Cheng) to remain hidden from and unseen by the public even after those societies have largely disbanded and the primary reason for secrecy (fall of the Ching dynasty) has ended?"

Almost anything is possible. That being the case, all we can realistically do, as you say, is determine what is *more likely* as opposed to *less likely*.

Rene,

I like your questions!!.... believe me, I asked them a lot while we were doing research.... I'll try to address them in a second, but first, I would like to compliment you and everyone on this thread... it is appears to be a very mature effort to examine Wing Chun roots and provide new information in an atmosphere of sincere cooperation.... most impressive! It has been my hope all along that documentation of the Ving Tsun Museum's efforts would generate a great many questions of this caliber and would spur further reasearch efforts by Wing Chun enthusiasts worldwide.

As for your questions: "Do you think it possible for a martial art particular to the secret societies to remain hidden from the public...?" Answer: It didn't remain hidden. There were plenty of leaks of bits and pieces.... i.e. the names Siu Nim Tau, Siu Lim Tau, Chum Kiu, Biu Jee, Luk Dim Boon Kwan, etc are widespread in many variation of Wing Chun. The only thing that didn't leak was the HFY name (for obvious reasons.... only a few persons in each generation were ever permitted deep enough into the organization to know this.... in light of the "9 Ancestors in Crime" execution policy of the Qing military, it is most understandable that identities at this level remained secret. Even after the fall of the Qing, we must remember that secret society members engaged in revolution (past or present) were still hunted as criminals. The need for secrecy was paramount!

Keep up the in-depth questioning. We all profit from well-intentioned serious examination.

Best regards,

Richard Loewenhagen

FIRE HAWK

10-28-2003, 10:08 AM

http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:L3HeYp-JUzYJ:groups.yahoo.com/group/wengshunkuen/message/9+Chan+Yiu+Min+Weng+Chun&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Phenix

10-28-2003, 10:45 AM

Originally posted by duende
Hendrik,

FWIW, it's easy to recite quotes and offer evidence from books. It's actually going out into the field to find and document your own evidence that's hard.

Duende,

The Chinese Said, when one is sincere, heaven will show the path.

We went study with Chan patriach to find out what is a Chan mindseal might "looks" like, We went study with Southern Shao lin Kuen related Chan patirach, We search for Emei 12 Zhuang drawing and Kuit, We trace through 3 generation of Emei 12 Zhuang works from 1950's. We make friends with Senior White Crane of Fujian practitioners who gave us the old Kuit of White Crane.........
We went to Shang Hai Din Chun Dang . We search the martial art who involved in china's 1850's uprising. We search the opera history of China, We search for Lee Man Mau, We search for Hung Gan..... We compare the finding with the old writing we have from different families. We travel from SEA to various part of China, We even visit the path where the Rebel general match into BeiJing which cause the last Ming emperor to hang himself.

And then, Rene played blind folded Judge on the meterials and cross examinine if there is any most likely connection, finally, let the data telling the stories. it can be blowing in any direction.

You are right. it's easy to recite quotes and offer evidence from books and sutras after more then 3 decades of travelling to different place of world and visited uncountable books store and Buddhism Bookstores cover from Penang Malaysia to TaiPei to Beijing for more then past three decades collecting more then few hundreds of books.

You mention field,
Let's talk about field in 1850's.

Yik Kam's has various different Slogan from the 1850's. Those slogans were used for one to identify oneself at that time.

According to the Yik Kam writing, people in the same group will be able to continous or matching the slogan, be it in words or movements. Friends from other party will have some similarity term.

One can find out from the below's attachment that from CLF of Canton to Shang Hai, in 1850's, there was a similarity term among them.

------------------

There is another code /slogan within many of Codes of Yik Kam which Said:

Kim Je, Bong Jarng Chang Ying Hung.

or

Sword finger, Bong elbow, Presented to Ying Hung (heros).

With movements, one can present this by

1, stand in the left front 30, right back 70 type of "cat stance" or front arrow back bow stance.

2, do a left side bong elbow with hand rest on the waist

3, do a right biu jee to the right front, but change the biu jee into sword finger.

One can see this type of movement even in today's Chinese Opera similar with the type in the movies Fairwell cocubine.

Below is the Secret Slogan of Cho li fut which at that time also supporting Anti-Qing Uprising.

Hung Ying Ji Sing,
Ying Hung Wing Sing.

Or

Heros of the Hung PArty are superior,
Heroes always win.

Note the parallel of the Term Heros or Ying Hung in these Slogan.

Today, One also can find different version of Ying Hung / Hung Ying writing of the Small Knive Society uprising in 1850 preserved in Dien Chun Dang of ShangHai today.

------------------------------------------------

I post the first slogan of Yik Kam days ago hoping people who make a strong claim to be the oldest or knowing the oldest WCK to match the slogan as Our Opera ancestors of WCK has set up, or even if one is from other friend party at least has some same term, such as CLF. And, I am no longer waiting now.

Finally,

One can claim whatever one likes, but don't screw the WCK opera ancestors and the GMs from different families with they are watery down version empty claims.

Those Ancestors and GMs are similar to the root of WCK, destroy the root will destroy the WCK. one can see what is the result of the Chinese Culture revolution. If you love WCK, don't go down the path of Culture revolution. IMHO.

These WCK opera ancestors and GMs knows what they are teaching. Evidentaly, if they don't know what they are teaching. we don't have this forum today and there is no Bruce Lee or Leong Seong or WSL or Sung Neng or Cho Hung Choi .... in different parts of the world.

IMHO, We might have same ancestors, we might have different. we migh from the reb boat, we might not, That is all respectable.

Hope that we all meditate on these.

This will be my last post until long time later.

Good bye

reneritchie

10-28-2003, 12:30 PM

Hi Richard,

Thank you very much for taking the time to engage in the conversation. I very much welcome the VTM and their publications primarily for the reason you mention--it propels the debate. In many fields, there are differences of opinion, sometimes even over the same raw data, and it is these differences that, in part, encourage everyone to work that much harder. As Western society has shown, sometimes it in not collaboration that achieves dynamic results, but healthy, friendly diversity.

On to the questions.

WRT 'leaks', things like SNT, SLT, CK, BJ, and to a far greater extent, things like Tan Sao, Fook Sao, etc. seem unlikely to be leaks as the 'language' does not fit the time (high Qing) or space (Societies). It is very much plain language, workers language, not the deep symbolism that traditionally went with MA in general (the Cheng Wu, or poetic language) and Societies in particular (who sometimes went so far as to make up new characters to hide their nomenclature).

Of course, WCK does have its own poetic language, where things like 'twin dragons emerge from the sea' is understable to myself (Sum Nung), Jim Roselando (Koo lo), and Hendrik (Cho) -- we all know instantly what movement it refers to, and what concept it conveys, and an 'outsider' does not, and this was the point of the 'language' back in the time of the high Qing and the Societies. If something were to have 'leaked', it seems more likely to have been a 'secret', and not a common, worker-type name.

Also, as you know, while HFY as a compound might not be a extent name, Hung Fa certainly was (Hung Fa Ting, Hung Fa Wui, Hung Fa Suen, Hung Fa Hei Ban, etc.), and Yee/Yi/Righteousness was an ideal long associated with the Brotherhood of River & Lake (even in pulp novels where the 'rebel fist' was given the catch-all name of Guyiquan (Ancient Righteous Boxing).)

--

Hendrik,

I know I give you a hard time over your material, but I really think it is very important that we don't just throw things together because they're convenient, but that everything truly binds together and fits within the established history and timeline of the Red Junk and the Societies. Look at the 'Shanghai Connection' article. It is still speculation at this point, to be sure, but it comes from your hands-on research in Shanghai, coroborated by published historical works by noted historians. And most importantly of all--Anyone else can look at the source material and independantly verify it.

duende

10-28-2003, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by FIRE HAWK
http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:L3HeYp-JUzYJ:groups.yahoo.com/group/wengshunkuen/message/9+Chan+Yiu+Min+Weng+Chun&hl=en&ie=UTF-8

Interesting post Firehawk! Nice little flashback to 1996.

PaulH

10-28-2003, 04:45 PM

Hendrik,

Since this is the last of your long winded posts and often repetitious themes, I do admired your feisty and genuine love of the WCK ancestors. You have given me many insights into the WCK origin and its characteristics. Why? You even convince me to hold the pillow to the great mystery of WC Jing! So just a short post to say thank you for the outpouring of tremendous posts in the past and a concise reminder to show up at the coming seminar! Ha! Ha!

We all need to know what it means to be honest. Honesty is more than not lying. It is truth telling, truth speaking, truth living, and truth loving.
- James E. Faust

Regards,

PH

reneritchie

10-29-2003, 08:17 AM

Didn't see Firehawk's original post, but yes, that is a great flashback! It's cool to look back and see how far things have come over these last years.

Originally, like many, the romance of the legends was very gripping for me. Thankfully, I was able to shed my biases and look more into the real history, which though not as nicely wrapped, perhaps, is every bit as intriguing in its own right.

I even remember the email I received in response to that post, from a gentleman in HK who laughed at me somewhat and said 'you know, those are just stories, it would be like me writing the history of England based on King Arthur...'

I suppose I could have taken offense, but instead I thanked him, and thank him still to this day, for making me go back and take another look.

As any writer knows, critics are *far* more valuable than supporters.

Chango

10-30-2003, 05:14 PM

R.O.F.L.O.L!

Good recovery Rene!!!!

So please indulge us with your experiences and travels to Southern China since having written this. please share with us the bombshells that contributed to your change in thinking! I think others would demand foot notes! But for me I'll just take your word for it. (maybe :)) LOL!

Sifu C. Noaks

yuanfen

10-30-2003, 06:17 PM

Being willing to change one's mind with consideration of things
previously obscure or un-noticed is a sign of maturity and growth
---qualities that serve analysis well. In the pursuit of knowledge there is often a necessary tension between the quest for certainty and a healthy distrust of dogmas and old views- even one's own.

Chango

10-30-2003, 07:51 PM

Great words yuanfen! however--

yuanfen wrote:Good luck Ed and Ken with the Fong Sifu seminar in the windy city.
I hope that folks with diverse backgrounds can take care of this opportunity to be exposed to very good wing chun instruction.
Sifu Fong does not get involved with lineage issues but is very open and thorough in discussing the art itself.

CN--- So being in AZ you must have taken the HFY people up on the frequent invites to experience HFY first hand from SiGung Gee! Do you believe in learning by experience or just PC / ineternet interaction. Is there karma on the web? LOL! you guys are killing me LOL! :)

Sifu C. Noaks

PS-- How about that coffee? (check my signature)

reneritchie

10-31-2003, 09:06 AM

Chango,

I'm glad your mind is as open as you wish everyone else's to be. Also glad it took you only 7 years to get to where I was in '96 (I wasn't in Southern China till '99). We can only hope this means that by 2011, you will have caught up to where I am today. The journey is the important thing, after all, and I admire as you keep on trying.

BTW- You are not my 'sifu'.

black and blue

10-31-2003, 09:26 AM

Once again Chango paints a great picture of his family - Sifu indeed?

:(

duende

10-31-2003, 10:45 AM

Black and Blue,

Chango merely grilled Rene for what Rene himself refers to as "the romance of the legends". Looks like Rene got his feathers ruffled... It happens.

Funny how you feel compelled to step in now. Where were you when the real attacks were being made??

And btw, I'll have Chango painted besides me for a KF family portrait anyday. Thank you very much.

As far as Joy is concerned... his bias has become somewhat 'old hat' for us. Chango just once again provided us all with an excellent example.

This thread was on it's way to resting in peace. So much for that....

Alex

CarlDouglas108

10-31-2003, 11:02 AM

Good point, I'd like to know where black and blue was when Sifu Victor Parlati was painting?.

I would say Sifu Noaks hit some sore spots?

Regards

CD

reneritchie

10-31-2003, 11:56 AM

Chango doesn't ruffle feathers or hit any spots. He's great in person (had the pleasure of meeting him in Dayton), and a heck of a fighter from what I've heard, he is (of his own admission) not the best online communicator in the world, and mostly he contributes to tension and argument (take a look to see how many non-politcal posts he makes--a good indicator of where and how he chooses to spend his time). But you know, that's fine, not everyone sees eye to eye, and at least he keeps on trying, and for that he deserves credit (even if it often makes things harder for the other VTM/HFY folks).

BTW- Where was Black&Blue before? Where are the VTM/HFY folks when Ken Chung or Augustine Fong or William Cheung or Leung Ting get insulted online? Where are you when I get insulted? Most people tend to stick up for their own, which is fine, but don't whine about it.

(And I've argued and insulted with Joy far worse than I have with any VTM/HFY person and we manage to get along okay now, so there's always hope. FWIW, I don't know Black&Blue at all, but he seems like standup person and I value his doing what he sees as right. And I will keep sticking up for VTM/HFY people when I think they're badly done by as well, so :p)

Chango

10-31-2003, 12:49 PM

Hello Alex and CD,
Thank you for the kind words. Maybe the portrait that these guys should worry about is thier own. I think it might be a little late to change this threads name to "a portrait of a serpant" LOL!
let's look at how Rene's tongue is forked when discussing the VTM and HFY and it's members but not when addressing others here in this thread is a fine example!

Rene wrote:Chango doesn't ruffle feathers or hit any spots. He's great in person (had the pleasure of meeting him in Dayton), and a heck of a fighter from what I've heard, he is (of his own admission) not the best online communicator in the world, and mostly he contributes to tension and argument (take a look to see how many non-politcal posts he makes--a good indicator of where and how he chooses to spend his time).

CN-- Rene your forked tongue is showing. How many times have you and I met face to face? LOL! You obviously haven't notice my other post from time to time. But of course you always seem to be involved when the VTM or HFY family is being attack. So I can see why you would think that.
On the time issue! Yes I must say you've got me there when we look at my web activities against yours. It is very clear where I spend my time. For me it is in the real world training. As for how you spend your time well how is the WCML and all of the internet projects going? I guess you and I both wear a broad band Black sash LOL! But for different reasons of course. I'm a big guy I think your might me Road runner or somthing like that LOL!

Rene wrote:(And I've argued and insulted with Joy far worse than I have with any VTM/HFY person and we manage to get along okay now, so there's always hope. FWIW, I don't know Black&Blue at all, but he seems like standup person and I value his doing what he sees as right. And I will keep sticking up for VTM/HFY people when I think they're badly done by as well, so )

CN--Now Rene "insulted" ? ROFLOL! Now why does it not suprize me that you don't use that forked tongue of yours on these two.LOL! Rene you begin to look like a game show host. Do I need to dig up the archives to prove my point about your anticks? I will spare this forum the trouble. Your history is speaking for it's self!

CN-- So let's stay on subject exactly what changed your mind Rene? Footnote or expriences or both? enough about me or the VTM the HFY family. This is what you wrote! so why the change now? please answer the question bottom line!

Sifu Noaks (creme and sugar please)

KPM

10-31-2003, 12:57 PM

Originally posted by duende

This thread was on it's way to resting in peace. So much for that....

Alex

---Yep! Chango saw to that now didn't he! What happened to that polite, friendly and productive discussion I was trying to have with Jeremy and Savi? Where did you guys go? You've let Chango change the whole tone of what we had going here.

Keith

Chango

10-31-2003, 01:07 PM

Hello,
I just simply ask the question what Changed Rene's thinking?
If how I ask this question offended you and others. I sincerly appologize but I think this is a reasonable question.
both questions posed to these chaps are all resonable.

Fact- Rene has had a change of heart some where along the line.
CN question - why and what did it?

Fact- Joy/yuanfen has been invited many times to meet GM Gee in person to exprience HFY in person. He has not showed up once!
CN question- Why haven't you showed up? Why do you choose to judge from the sidelines when being invited on to the field?

These are logical questions for this discussion. If these questions are viewed as insults or "feather ruffling" I have to say that I don't think the problem is mine. I would persoanlly like to do with out Yuanfen stepping in and helping Rene dodge the question. I will be the first to take responsibility if I came across harsh. I hope this thread can recover. I'm sorry if I'm comming to the thread late. With my schedual I only get one day to get on the internet.

C. Noaks

CarlDouglas108

10-31-2003, 01:55 PM

If you truly are interested in having an adult conversation without the hecklers and backseat drivers, it may be well worth your while to sign up on HFY108.COM (http://www.hfy108.com/forums/), I know we have a few members from other familys over there.
Sifu Redmond is one and I noticed someone from Leung Tings family just joined??

Regards

CD

CarlDouglas108

10-31-2003, 03:41 PM

black and blue, have you taken the time to read any of the posts on HFY108?.
I think there you will find there isn't the war of words you find here?.

Regards

CD

yuanfen

10-31-2003, 03:44 PM

Re-Chango and Co-

No worries. No dogma ran over my karma- anyways.

Wow--- a little while ago came a special priority mail from an anonymous but generous person- who I would like to publicly thank.

Enclosed was a copy of the rare out of print book by Gene Tunney
entitled "A Man Must Fight". I always wanted a copy.

Young folks may not know or remember---Gene Tunney was basically a light heavy but he defeated Jack Dempsey twice- one of them involved the controversial long count. Footwork, timing and the jab...beat the little heavier Dempsey's vaunted right hand and the left hook.

Bruce Lee apparently had a copy of this book and had it in his library on boxing.(Analysis of boxing played a role in his development). BTW some of you know that MR. R.Clausenitzer
(WSL/WC) and co author of one of the if not the first book in English on wing chun-who is on this list was present when Bruce Lee had a youthful boxing match in Hong Kong.

Muchas gracias (anonymous) friend.

yuanfen, serendipity and kismet- what a treat on Halloween!
While waiting with candy for doorbell ringers tonight, I will be reading the book!

yuanfen

11-01-2003, 07:09 AM

CN question- Why haven't you showed up? Why do you choose to judge from the sidelines when being invited on to the field?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have had free tickets to football games that i didn't use.
Priorities of time and curiosities.
I can judge how well the Arizona Cardinals play without being there.
BTW- use of sifu handle on the forum by a forum partcipant
is not the best of judgements.

Train

11-01-2003, 10:06 AM

I can judge how well the Arizona Cardinals play without being there.

You mean you rather not be there????????? Every time I watch baseball on TV I fall asleep. Going to the game is an experience that is priceless. I think your not even watchong it on TV but listening on the radio huh?? You must be out of your mind Dude!!! :)

Priorities of time and curiosities.

I'm not saying you are giving an excuse but this is a good example of it :)

I never been to China but I watch documentaries of China all the time. Dude!!!! I would rather go to China in person to just to experience it. I heard the people there are very nice and very open minded.

But then again some people rather watch documentaries. Good luck..........

Peace out

canglong

11-01-2003, 12:17 PM

originally posted by yuanfen
I can judge how well the Arizona Cardinals play without being there.
BTW- use of sifu handle on the forum by a forum partcipant
is not the best of judgements.

Passing judgement in general is not usually advised or practiced by people of open mind or sincere of heart and passing judgemnet on things you have yet to experience or people you have yet to meet is always reguarded as improper etiquette and often times prejudging things unknown is the largest single reason ones own perceptions become misleading and groundless. There is no replacement for first hand experience NONE this is one of the first things we learn as martial artist and should be something we never forget or lose sight of as people. Chaudhuri Sifu, any time you want to experience Hung Fa Yi let us know our kwoon has been visted by and is respected by students and practitioners the world over who understand the true meaning of hou chyun san sau or learning first hand from knowledgable teachers. Again our tea is always hot and our minds are always open and we look forward to your visit.

Ernie

11-01-2003, 01:27 PM

tony
[[Passing judgement in general is not usually advised or practiced by people of open mind or sincere of heart and passing judgemnet on things you have yet to experience or people you have yet to meet is always reguarded as improper etiquette and often times prejudging things unknown is the largest single reason ones own perceptions become misleading and groundless. There is no replacement for first hand experience NONE this is one of the first things we learn as martial artist and should be something we never forget or lose sight of as people. ]]

if this is how you feel and i have no reason to think other wise , i have a question , i borrowed the mastering kung fu book and read , keeping a open mind , and always looking for new ways to look at things , yet i was disturbeb by the constant underlined reference or implication to hfy being the only real complete system , with out having experienced all other systems first hand how could any one make such bold statements , beyond the star trek type phrases like battle array and time and space dimension type stuff , there wasn't anything i have not seen to the same degree in almost all other systems of wing chun i have come across , now i'm not saying the information provided wasn't good it was .... it did feel a little scientologyish at times to be honest , but still there was good info and good fighting tactics .
i was really bugged by the implication that if bruce lee had found hfy he would not have needed to go elsewhere that was a bit of a stretch.
no i'm just wondering not trying to be insulting or have any hidden agenda , you guys might be a great bunch of guys and i would assume you are , but the wording you use can be percieved in a negitive or bias light .

canglong

11-01-2003, 02:08 PM

originally posted by Ernie
if this is how you feel and i have no reason to think other wise , i have a question , i borrowed the mastering kung fu book and read , keeping a open mind , and always looking for new ways to look at things , yet i was disturbeb by the constant underlined reference or implication to hfy being the only real complete system , with out having experienced all other systems first hand how could any one make such bold statements Are you suggesting incomplete is a negative conotation, I doubt the authors of the book would agree. Ernie, it has been my experience when people hear, view television or read things and become emotional("disturbed") one way or the other it has more to do with the particular individual than the material. If I can give you my take it on your statement I hope it can help. The job of the Ving tsun museum is to research and expereience all other (wing chun) systems first hand and my take on the point they are making is in their travels and studies to date the only complete system they have encountered is Hung Fa Yi. Though for the most accurate account of how many systems the museum has had first hand expereince with we would need to contact them directly. Secondly Hung Fa Yi distinguishes itself from art and self expression by incorporating a science and the wing chun formula which make it complete in that if you adhere to the formula there is nothing to add and nothing to subract from the system. Hung Fa Yi is not subjective to others interpretation as are other martial "arts" which clearly by their own definition make them incomplete and as such each practitioner is free to add or subtract from the art in pursuit of "evolving" the art to its next phase. This is not a positive or negative view of comparing hung fa yi science with other martial arts it is just an accurate way of comparing hfy science with other martial arts. As such any emotional attachment is not inteneded by the writers and is soley the responsibility of the reader in my opinion. Again the only way to expereince this difference and make the comparison yourself is to visit a a hung fa kwoon or seminar if possible. You can also gain further insight into hfy over at hfy108.com. Thanks for the question Ernie always a pleasure responding to sincere questions.

thirdperson

11-01-2003, 02:54 PM

Are you suggesting incomplete is a negative conotation, I doubt the authors of the book would agree.

When making a comparison between two things, one complete, and one incomplete, incomplete is without a doubt a negative connotation, unless we are discussing something negative to begin with. A complete grocery list is better, but you'd rather not be a complete jerk.

I dare suggest that if the authors didn't agree that complete was better than incomplete, they would not have made the claim to begin with.

I don't think the HFY family can expect a higher level of acceptance than they are already getting from martial artists that have learned systems that have been publicly taught and put to the test for a long time. Ip Man didn't get his butt kicked a lot, y'know? What did he need with 1,2,3,5,6? It is all better than not having any training.

Suppose there are two men, and each have a pistol. One man has been shooting his pistol in real life for a while, but the second man shows up and says his pistol is bigger, and was made BEFORE the newer pistol, plus it has better sights.
The first guy is just thinking "a bullet through your body is a bullet through your body, and I've been in the world shooting longer than you have." He doesn't need the pistol that is strangely both newer and older at the same time. He's already got a pistol. Do you follow?

What I still don't understand, is why some people feel slighted by HFY. HFY is a system, with it's version of history, just like any other system. What is there to argue about? Accept or disregard whatever you wish. Nothing is being forced on anybody.

yuanfen

11-01-2003, 03:15 PM

We are drifting as we often do from the topic of the thread- in this case theories of the origin of wc. We keep coming back to
visiting a kwoon or buying a book. The original topic of the thread has pretty well played out it seems to me.

KPM

11-01-2003, 03:25 PM

Hi Tony!

Let's see if we can stear this thread back to some productive discussion. :-)

Originally posted by canglong
Hung Fa Yi distinguishes itself from art and self expression by incorporating a science and the wing chun formula which make it complete in that if you adhere to the formula there is nothing to add and nothing to subract from the system. Hung Fa Yi is not subjective to others interpretation as are other martial "arts" which clearly by their own definition make them incomplete and as such each practitioner is free to add or subtract from the art in pursuit of "evolving" the art to its next phase. This is not a positive or negative view of comparing hung fa yi science with other martial arts it is just an accurate way of comparing hfy science with other martial arts.

---I assume "other martial arts" includes "popular WCK"? This is something I don't understand, so maybe you can help to clear it up. Prior to reading the new book I had heard many from the HFY family talk about its "HFY formula" and how this set it apart from other versions of WCK and made it so scientific. So this was one of the main portions of the new book that I was interested in reading. I was a bit surprised by what I found. Lets take a brief look at the "HFY forumula." It is organzed by the following numbers: 1.2.3.5.6.5.....

1 = The centerline concept. Explained the same way I learned it in "popular WCK." Found in every version of WCK that I have come across.

2 = The two-line defense, referring to range and depth. This refers to defending the zone from the lead elbow forward with the "man sau hand" or lead hand while defending the zone from the lead elbow back with the "wu sau hand" or with the rear hand. It also incorporates the idea of simultaneous attack and defense. I learned all this in "popular WCK" and again, it has been part of every WCK version that I have seen.

3 = The three refence points. These are the high point (between the nose and top lip), the middle point (at the solar plexus), and the low point (at the tan tien). While I did not learn these as a specific entity with their chinese names, all three were utilized in the "popular WCK" that I learned. HFY has simply put a name to something most everyone else has already been doing.

5 = The five-line concept. This consists of the centerline, the two shoulder lines, and two "nipple lines". We all use the centerline. I learned the two shoulder lines as the outer boundaries and how they become attack and defense lines depending upon orientation to the opponent. The "nipple lines" are described by the book only as the line on which the elbows are positioned. While I never learned about a "nipple line", the elbow positioning is the same. It seems that HFY has just given a name to something that other WCK players were doing as well.

6 = The six gates. Inside and outside, upper, middle and lower. Again, this was part of the "popular WCK" that I learned, and seems to be a part of every WCK version that I have seen.

final 5 = "Five Elemental Arrays for Facing and Pursuit." This is the only portion of the formula that does not appear to be a part of every other WCK version I have been exposed to. But it sure seems like a reworking of the "Traditional WCK" teachings about the 5 phases of combat. So this wouldn't be unique to HFY either.

So please help me out here Tony. Please help me understand how this "HFY Formula" makes HFY so different and so much more "scientific" than "popular WCK." I don't see anything here as explained in the new book that is different that what I have learned in the past. HFY has certainly repackaged a lot of the concepts in new "gee wiz" scientific-sounding terminology. But once you get through the complicated language, the concepts seem to be pretty standard WCK.

Keith

anerlich

11-01-2003, 03:43 PM

IMO the words "science" and "complete" do not sit well together.

Scientific understanding changes over time almost by definition.

Only pseudo-sciences like astrology and creation science claim to be complete and never require changing over time as more data comes in or (deep echo on) "paradigms shift" (echo off).

This is OF COURSE not to place any emotional connotations on HFY or any other MA :eek: but ...

Following the reasoning expressed above, I'm glad I do not practise a "complete" martial art.

anerlich

11-01-2003, 03:50 PM

If you truly are interested in having an adult conversation without the hecklers and backseat drivers

I think the hecklers and backseat drivers help deflate zealotry, insularity, pomposity and grandioseness, so I'll stay here thanks all the same.

BTW, for any people outside US ordering the book, my delivery date has now been set back by Amazon until mid or late December. Don't hold your breath, in other words, and I wouldn't consider it as a Christmas gift if you want it there on the day.

Ernie

11-01-2003, 08:16 PM

tony ,
thank's for the answer but to be honest with , since i could care less about history '' i'm into modern attribute training '' and since when i hear the word complete i have to ask myself '' complete in respect to what ?
i have been in enough fights and trained with enough top notch fighters from all walks of life to now there is no way on earth you can quantiy a street fight , the only certianty is uncertaintiy

many people no matter what style try and crystalize a fight and create a '' formula'' to solve this problem .
but the problem lies in being human , and the human condition can not be fit into a neat little box of x and y = victory

but it makes people feel better when they have something solid to hold onto call it a security blanket of sorts ,

me i enjoy the chaos , the more time i spend in it the more relaxed and adaptable i become .
so my path is better suited for attribute development and adaptability,by way of experience and srtress overload emotional and physical.
this way i can make the human condition work in a natural progression not force it into a mathimatical one .
you know force circle into the square

but i do wish you guys the best and if we ever run into each other we can play and see how effective things are , that's always the best way to judge seminars arn't my style i get bored by lectures
thanks again for your responce

duende

11-01-2003, 11:02 PM

"I think the hecklers and backseat drivers help deflate zealotry, insularity, pomposity and grandioseness, so I'll stay here thanks all the same."

Anerlich...

"By staying here' are you refering to the combatcentres in your link under your signature? Have you read there version of WC origins? Do you know by chance where they got there info??? Come on mate!! Tell us!

From my experience hecklers are just idiots, who only gained their confidence to speak up because of the fact that they can hide in a crowd.

Backseat drivers are nothing more than an annoying nuisance that sometimes cause accidents. This is due to the fact that they pay too much time focusing their attention on the reality of other's rather than being aware of their own.

duende

11-02-2003, 12:17 AM

Keith,

I don't really care what WC anyone prefers... honestly. To each his own, but I can safely say that if this is all you absorbed from reading the section on the WC formula then you might want to return the MKF book.

When trying to understand life outside you actually have to step outside of your house . There's much more to life than just what you can see through an open door.

You have taken the shared common WC terms we employ in the WC formula and supplied your own definitions and understanding. Kind of like an alien would think that a burrito, a egg roll, and a fallafel wrap were all the same thing. Just because they are all food wraped in some starch/carb device.

((1 = The centerline concept. Explained the same way I learned it in "popular WCK." Found in every version of WCK that I have come across.))

True, except we believe in a 50/50 stance. Also every time we shifted from side to side our center of gravity stays exactly in the same spot. The YMWC I did used a 70/30 stance and everytime we shifted, our center of gravity went to the opposite side.

((2 = The two-line defense, referring to range and depth. This refers to defending the zone from the lead elbow forward with the "man sau hand" or lead hand while defending the zone from the lead elbow back with the "wu sau hand" or with the rear hand. It also incorporates the idea of simultaneous attack and defense. I learned all this in "popular WCK" and again, it has been part of every WCK version that I have seen.))

Yes... We all have two hands! But as the concept of two-line defense is simple to understand. The actual science behind where our hands reside, our elbow positioning, and in what manner our hands switch roles is much different.

((3 = The three refence points. These are the high point (between the nose and top lip), the middle point (at the solar plexus), and the low point (at the tan tien). While I did not learn these as a specific entity with their chinese names, all three were utilized in the "popular WCK" that I learned. HFY has simply put a name to something most everyone else has already been doing.))

Three reference points... Tin Yan Dei Saam Mo Kiu. The fundemental concept to our whole system. Trust me on this one... You haven't the slightest idea of what you are talking about. This links our system directly to CHi Sim Weng Chun and the Southern Saolin Wing Chun Tong. Just ask yourselve where does your tan sau reside. Then ask one of your school-mates.

((5 = The five-line concept. This consists of the centerline, the two shoulder lines, and two "nipple lines". We all use the centerline. I learned the two shoulder lines as the outer boundaries and how they become attack and defense lines depending upon orientation to the opponent. The "nipple lines" are described by the book only as the line on which the elbows are positioned. While I never learned about a "nipple line", the elbow positioning is the same. It seems that HFY has just given a name to something that other WCK players were doing as well.))

The five-line concept is the horizontal map that outlines our physical structural positioning. If you think you have this, but just don't have a name for it, your kidding yourself. Either way you should thank us for clearing the fog form your glasses.

((6 = The six gates. Inside and outside, upper, middle and lower. Again, this was part of the "popular WCK" that I learned, and seems to be a part of every WCK version that I have seen.))

Are you telling me that while in a 70/30 stance with your toes pointed in that you have the same footwork and lower-gate defence theory???

Keith..

All fruit's not the same. There are apples, peaches, nectarines, and etc.... There's also unripe fruit, over-ripe fruit, and rotten fruit. There is also seasons for when to pick the fruit. You have missed the entire point of the WC formula. These are reference points that we never leave. They are consistently expressed in everything we do... be it SNT,CK, or BG. OR our SLT drill, wooden Dummy, and weapons.

canglong

11-02-2003, 12:42 AM

Thirdparty,
your analogy did not mention that the second shooter's weapon shoots further and that he was shouting out of range of the first shooter before the second shot the first, in other words I disagree with your analogy and let my statement stand you are more than welcome to agree or disagree but your argument was not persausive enough for me to change or restate my original point.

originally posted by kpm
---I assume "other martial arts" includes "popular WCK"? This is something I don't understand, so maybe you can help to clear it up. Prior to reading the new book I had heard many from the HFY family talk about its "HFY formula" and how this set it apart from other versions of WCK and made it so scientific. Keith, often times what we don't say is just as significant as what we do say. I noticed when describing the characteristics of the formula you may or may not have noticed this but it is refered to as the wing chun formula not hung fa yi formula HFY is not trying to distance itself from other forms of wing chun that is the work of others. Secondly you neglected to mention saam dim yat sin dihng yuhn sahn or ngh douh lunk muhn fa kihn kwan concepts. Since these concepts were actually mentioned as the first points in chapter 5 titled wing chun formula I think they are worth noting when trying to interpret the formula itself. The second part of the title of the book itself may be even more important and helpful in answering your questions as well because it directs the reader towards the shaolin connection of wing chun. So where is the connection in relation to the formula. For that we have to look at Tin Yan Dei Saam Mo Kiu which is a shaolin method of training which hung fa yi and chi sim weng chun both utilize in their training methodologies. So, briefly, Saam dim yat sin is how the formula is put into motion by not allowing 3 (elbow, hip and knee)points to make contact on one line. Secondly ngh douh lunk muhn fa kihn kwan five ways and six gates influence the universe is in reference to the daoist phylosophy of self realization through first hand expereince in this particular case the idiom is making the point any physical experience must come through those six gates as defined by the five lines of the formula. Lastly these are trained making use of Tin yan dei samm mo kiu. If any of these elements were to be missing from ones training that particular training would no longer be considered to be following the wing chun formula.
originally posted by kpm
So please help me out here Tony. Please help me understand how this "HFY Formula" makes HFY so different and so much more "scientific" than "popular WCK." I don't see anything here as explained in the new book that is different that what I have learned in the past. HFY has certainly repackaged a lot of the concepts in new "gee wiz" scientific-sounding terminology. But once you get through the complicated language, the concepts seem to be pretty standard WCK. To understand the principles and concepts behind the formula you must first acknowledge the basis for their existance,Tin Yan Dei Saam Mo Kiu . Hung fa yi is a principle based science not a technique driven art. This can not be over stated. Describing the formula based on technique or simple definition is inherently wrong the concept can not be seperated from the principle which can not be seperated from the proper application of applying the proper energy at the correct moment in time and space and expect to understand the original intent behind the system.

When you state that there is nothing in the formula that you haven't already learned by studying popular wing chun if that includes the concepts/phylosophy of Tin Yan Dei Saam Mo Kiu you are correct if that includes the conept of saam dim yat sin you are again correct also if that includes the concept of ngh douh lunk muhn fa kihn kwan yes you are correct if not then I submit that these wing chun concepts can possibly further your own wing chun development yet they can not fully be comprehended by merely reading them or hearing them described on the internet they must be expereienced first hand.
originally posted by kpm
HFY has simply put a name to something most everyone else has already been doing.
originally posted by kpm
It seems that HFY has just given a name to something that other WCK players were doing as well. Somtimes a little clarity is all that is needed in helping someone advance ask any marine how valuable attention to detail is or how important are the little things and I am sure they will tell you they can often mean the difference between life and death.
originally posted by ernie but it makes people feel better when they have something solid to hold onto call it a security blanket of sorts , Actually Ernie it is possible some would refer to your expectation of chaos as just such a blanket because it is possible that we could be talking about removing that chaos that you would be looking for, or wing chun could be considered that blanket maybe we each have our own blanket which are more clearly defined by x+y=u everytime and maybe it is possible to train for x and y because if they are attributes then naturally they can be trained for so I think we agree more than we disagree, any how always a pleasure.

thirdperson

11-02-2003, 10:52 AM

anerlich

11-02-2003, 03:15 PM

"By staying here' are you refering to the combatcentres in your link under your signature? Have you read there version of WC origins? Do you know by chance where they got there info??? Come on mate!! Tell us!

I was actually refering [sic] to KFO, not my own organisation, which I though was pretty obvious given that my post appeared there. But ...

We at Combat Centres have a pretty open but sceptical attitude to the history thing. Much has been written, said and will continue to be written, but nothing that shouldn't be taken with a whole shaker of salt has yet come to light. Including no doubt, recent books. I have yet to hear of anyone defending themselves with history (Though I can understand people getting bored to death, I guess ...)

IF I want to know where they got there [sic] info, you should go to the article on the site co written by my Si-hing, Alfredo del-Brocco and <hushed, reverent tone>Benny Meng</hushed, reverent tone>. If there's something wrong with that info, I guess Benny's at least partly to blame. If he's holding himself up as an authority on WC history, unlike Alfredo, then I guess he should accept the greater responsibility. At least you should respect your seniors (Benny) enough not to disparage their what I hope were serious efforts.

I'm flattered that you took the time to look at our humble little site :)

Consider yourself told .... "mate". Come back any time, unless that back seat's already full!

duende

11-02-2003, 05:05 PM

Anerlich,

I have nothing what so ever against combatcentres, or you for that matter. I just thought your last post was pretty harsh, and somewhat hypocritical considering where you train, and where they got a good deal of their historical data.

You should try driving once in awhile... it aint all what it's cracked up to be.

Alex

anerlich

11-02-2003, 06:17 PM

duende,

Sorry, it appears I misunderstood your intentions.

If your referring to my backseat driving post, perhaps you are right. My experience with lineage-specific forums (we used to have one on a website in a previous incarnation) is that they tend to stick to the party line of the organisation and allow no criticism of that party line, warranted or otherwise. My post prejudged HFY108 without even having been there, which I agree was unwarranted.

I'm still not going there till I get the book, and I will still prefer a forum which is non-lineage-aligned, even if people act immature sometimes (Which I personally enjoy on occasion).

Not stating categorically that this is what has happened here, but I think that if you use a forum to promote yourself or your products, you should also be prepared to accept whatever comes back at you as well, good or bad, rather than expect people to shift to somewhere you find more amenable to your marketing or organisational philosophy. As I think Rene said, your critics are more valuable than your fans.

As for the complete/scientific post, I stand by what I wrote there. Learing to fight effectively will IMO always be more heuristic and personal, than deterministic and universal.

duende

11-02-2003, 08:26 PM

Anerlich,

I agree with everything you said...

I think the real problem is the web in itself. In that it allows for great communication and exchanging of ideas. However unfortunately at the same time it also allows for some extreme mis-representation.

If you ever won the lottery and made a trip to San Francisco you'd be quite surprized.

got to get back to work....

Alex

anerlich

11-02-2003, 09:10 PM

If you ever won the lottery and made a trip to San Francisco you'd be quite surprized.

No doubt ....

OTOH, I think if anyone from your crew came to Sydney the same would be true.

black and blue

11-03-2003, 02:25 AM

Why did I post when I did?

Well, the thread was quite interesting and some of what the HFY guys have to say makes for interesting reading (as has always been the case)... and then there is Chango.

Sure, there are others on the forum who seem to like slagging people off - but Chango's attacks really bug me... mostly because they are personal, and largely because as a Sifu he's not exactly doing the other HFY members any favours. There never seems to be an ounce of respect.

Of course, there will always be other HFY guys here who will post after Chango's musings and kiss his butt. :rolleyes: But as far as I'm concerned a Sifu should not act the way Chango does.

It's that simple. A Sifu indeed... but perhaps not in deed.

There - the Black and Blue rant over. :p

As for the rest of the topic of discussion, I have little to add as I'm fairly new to this art. But regardless of time in, respect should always be present, IMO.

CarlDouglas108

11-03-2003, 07:10 AM

Hi black & blue, I think Sifu Noaks has a history with the people he addressed that goes back further than your or my short time training Wing Chun Kuen?.
It seemed nothing more than a harmless jape highlighting the faults in the posts and also the fact that these same people given the chance are so quick to correct HFY members?.
If you were to meet Sifu Noaks you would be amazed at his skills and knowledge, he has devoted 25 years of his life to Kung Fu and it shows.
black & blue, have you had a chance to check out HFY108.COM (http://www.hfy108.com/forums/) yet.

Regards

CD

black and blue

11-03-2003, 07:18 AM

Hello,

I checked out your forum when it first went up, and it was, as to be expected, a little quiet. I haven't checked it since, but will no doubt do so.

As a forum used mostly by your family, I would expect it to be a little friendlier than here (a more open forum not affiliated with any particular line).

But like I said, I'll have another look. :)

Duncan

Ps. Chango's posts still make me frown. Regardless of his skills, he still ought to be a little more respectful. He is, after all, a representative of GG.

Just my opinion.

Phenix

11-03-2003, 07:35 AM

Just finished read the VTM book while travelling.

The book give me an impression// interpretation of perhaps HFY is an original of evelasting spring, a sister of Chisim Weng Chun and Hung gar, or shao lin art as VTM claim.

Mr. Biu, who later become Hung Gan Biu, while joining the Red Dandana uprising, some how incoorporate to his Shao lin art what he was taught by the Praise spring opera ancestors . he is a senior of his own family, But, a later comer joining the opera ancestors of praise spring, thus, not that senior within the ring of praise spring ancetors, as his name, Hung Gan Biu has idicated, and HFY is his further evol art .

It is a fun book to read and certainly VTM has put lots of effort to it. It present a different view to look at Praise Spring which is view from an angle of IF Chi sim Weng Chun as tjhe reference of Originality of Praise the Spring , which as any one's opinion can be accept , but don't have to be agreed.

Similarly if someone write a book that Praise spring actually was started by Gordon ? the westerner general of Cheng Kuo-Fan, and based western boxing as the reference of originality of Praise the spring. that is also acceptable,

but again don't have to be agreed, since everyone is free to make any kind of assumption or claim.,

It is great that VTM write abook to view Praise Spring from different angle and different set of reference. This book add another color to the Praise Spring. IMHO, VTM did a great job with the information they have based on the angle they see.

reneritchie

11-03-2003, 03:13 PM

Hey Chango,

I just simply ask the question what Changed Rene's thinking?

No, you didn't, but if that was really the point of your posts, I'm happy to answer:

I did some research. I read historical works by experts in the field who quickly and compellingly dismissed most of the creation myths, especially the ones involving Shaolin.

I think the point of confusion is this:

I let the information mold the working theory, and not the other way around. In the end, I don't care if WCK came from Shaolin, Emei, England, or South Central. I'm just interested in the most reasonable theory possible. Right now, I believe that the information points rather strongly to a non-Shaolin origin, but I will happily evolve my opinion again if/when a compelling argument (and dogmatic personal belief does not constitute that) is made.

See, if you latch onto a theory and make everything dependant on that (especially if its a business and not just an academic endeavor), you develop far too much attachment, and far too much bias, and it becomes too easy to dismiss or rationalize information that doesn't match your pre-existing theory.

But, hey, if you prove your theory, if you *show the work* and not just talk about it and your own personal beliefs, my hat will be off to you. I will say congrats and thanks a million for sparing the rest of us the work, and I will ship you the (not too expensive) beverage of your choice. Same offer goes to Hendrik and anyone else working on this.

Unlike others, I've shown my opinion *can* and *will* evolve. And I welcome others to show likewise.

yuanfen

11-03-2003, 09:04 PM

Comments on Hendrik's post in brackets:

Just finished read the VTM book while travelling.

((I just got through looking at the book. I have not read it word for word.))

The book give me an impression// interpretation of perhaps HFY is an original of evelasting spring, a sister of Chisim Weng Chun and Hung gar, or shao lin art as VTM claim.

((Weng and wing are different characters...apparently different labels for things that are quite different from each other.
The "history" sections are full of elaborate assertions. The assertions are just that- assertions-not really academic history.
But no matter-if people want to believe the asserions- ok by me.
By way of analogy- different seminaries teach elaborate but differring church histories. Primarily a matter of belief.
At least to me we are a long ways off from havinga reliable history of wing chun- particularly beyond the red boat era.
For me it gets shaky beyond Leung Jan.
But neither do I assume that Leung Jan invented it.
The complexity and depth of the art points towards long term incremental development.))

It is a fun book to read

((Really? We differ. The long strung "historical" assertions were putting me to sleep. But then some of Rene's and even hendrik's
posts have come close to putting me to sleep. too. I am a bit of a history buff but not necessarily a wing chun history buff and the discussions did not wet my appetite))

and certainly VTM has put lots of effort to it.

((That is very evident- and I wish the HFY folks well in their art))

but again don't have to be agreed, since everyone is free to make any kind of assumption or claim.,

((My point too))

((BTW there is a little grauitous rant in the book about internet and forum pseudo experts. Surprising since the HFY folks have made such a concerted effort on the net to push HFY..

Many of the really good wing chun people I know are not net chatters. So judging wing chun one way or the other based on net forum discussions is premature.

The postures and stances that I saw in the book were sufficiently different and provides contrasts to major Ip Man wing chun lineages. Different-not necessarily superior.
Some of the stuff is old wine in new bottles-lines, gates, biu fingers up-biu fingers down etc.
I agree though that hands on training from knowledgeable instructors is the best way to learn wing chun. back to square one- the search for first rate kung fu instructors is not easy and is part of the quest of a serious kung fu student.
Good luck to those who choose and do HFY. Sorry for typos.
Shut eye time.))

Ernie

11-03-2003, 09:20 PM

joy
i agree with you it was a very dry read , i went through it twice just to make sure i wasn't tuning out to much on trekky talk such as battle arrays and 10 dimensions beam me up scotty stuff . if you can swim through all the hype , there is good technical and tactical information but defeinetly nothing new , just re worded and repackaged , still comes down to two arms to legs and one guy walking away the other getting carried out .
but to each there own , and it is everyones right to make a living , i would be interested to test this '' formula in a mass attack bar fight situation '' were all hell breaks out . but hey on paper anything is possible

i'll wait to see the movie

Phenix

11-03-2003, 11:22 PM

Hi Joy, Ernie,

It is fun because I am sitting in Long Beach's Renaissance hotel, facing the ocean view, listern to the rain and an old song while reading...

You ask me if I love you
And I choke on my reply
I'd rather hurt you honestly,
then mislead you with a lie...

and sometimes when we touch,
The honesty's too much
and I have to close my eyes and hitde....

At time I'd like to break you
and drive you to your knes.
At times I'd like to breakthrought
and hold you endlessly............

duende

11-04-2003, 12:15 AM

Ernie...

Re-worded and re-packaged huh??? The devil's in the details. I'm sorry you fail to notice the signifigance of this.

Take Chi sau for instance. In HFY Chi Sau encompasses three areas of focus. (Kiu Sau, Chi Kiu, and finally Chi Sau) Each of these areas come with layers of SLT drills and levels of understanding.

No offense, but I never experienced anything like this in my Yip Man training.

Don't worry... I'm not trying to hype you or push HFY on the net. To each his own... Go with whatever MA you identify best with. However as an intro to HFY theory the MKF book offers alot of valuable info IMO.

Read my response to KPM as I think you might find it interesting.

Ernie

11-04-2003, 04:15 AM

duende
1
your assuming all i know is yip man wing chun , i have trained in much more than just that , and out side of wing chun as well . and basically , when it comes down to combat there are theroies and stradagies and body mechnics , and attributes you develop to achieve these goals it all comes down to speed , timing , distance ,power , and adaptability
if you are covering all these in a live enviroment against aggresive opponents both inside and out side your system then you have a complete approach to combat .

2. as far as a complete system everybody and there momma claims that in all forms of ma , doesn't exisit
a system is simply training methods and idea's , words , concepts , some better then others depending on the individuals needs .

as for the ranges chi sau kui sau blah blah blah wrist , fore arms ,2 hands in 2 hands out , 1 hand in hands out both right and left , seen things like it and been taught the manipulation of range and contact points in yip man , wsl ,gary lam wing chun , and i'm sure were not the only ones who do it . even say this concept in filipino knife senstivity drills , hate to break it to you but other humans have actually notice that range and how to develop feel and body alighnment there , nothing new

if your mind is open and you look from the percpective of the human body and atttribute development , and your smart enough to think out of the box , you will see how things are more similar then not .

just because there re worded or repackaged doesn't mean they don't work , just means i have seen the idea before , it wasn't a big secret to me perhaps it was to you and that's why your so over protective , just do your thing bro who cares what everyone thinks , if it's good and works for you that should be enough .

Phenix

11-04-2003, 08:17 AM

One has to passing the gate of flexflow with mind and body to get "there".

The flexflow where flexibility flow, silence, spacious (space), and peace co-exist in the same instant.

Ernie

11-04-2003, 08:30 AM

hendrik
seamless adaptability ? no ''i'' just the moment and what it calls for , no tan sau , no bong sau , no wing chun , just that which is needed ?

Phenix

11-04-2003, 09:51 AM

one has to pass through the gate of experiencing mind/body flexflow to be there.

The flexflow is a coexist of continouse flexible flow, silence, spacial (as for space), and peace.

after that, attachement to past, present, future, time, space, fomulars, technics, self........... is a burden.

similar to a ocean wave surfer, no wave is the same wave twice, no self has the same mood twice.... but the wave the surder flex flow beutifully at any instance....

how can one reading an operating manual and following a programing flow chart in an open everchanging environment and condition or while riding on top of a wave?

Trying to do that will cause great suffering. such as attach to who one was yesterday and extropolate into today, and carry on the "dead completed self " of yesterday. There will be no fresh no lively no flexibliilty, no adaption, ............ no living.
And resentment and hatret and egoistic continous to extrapoted..... specifically speaking I am a second ago is not the same I am now.

Can one stop extrapolating and stop carrying over the past to live in fresh?

Phenix

11-04-2003, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by Ernie
hendrik
seamless adaptability ? no ''i'' just the moment and what it calls for , no tan sau , no bong sau , no wing
chun , just that which is needed ?

There always Ernie way of eating, sleeping, laughing, crying,.....

it is just Ernie don't walking the same everyday with 5 inch a part similar to a robot or eating 3.55555 gm of proten every meal.

Who doesn't know how to live? you don't have to k,now how to live. just living.

It is strange that people trying to learn to become a Robort and thinking that is sulvation, that is the omni superior, that is........ can some one looks at it and say Hey wait a minute I dont want to be a robot and I AM NOT A ROBOT. I DON'T HAVE TO BE ONE.

Chan and WCK teaches people not to be an animal or a perfect clone or a robot, but to be living. however, someone always seems to pulll reverse gear of thinking, it will be nice if there is this ....... to follow and to be the best....

while passing the gate of flexflow, it means the old ways of living has to go and melt down. because Ernie is just a label of a flewflow of energy continous to perfecting itself lively, balancely, peacefully and freely.
Thus, it is a nature to change from Diaz to Lucy Liu... naturally/ :D

Living in it and beyond it. doing a tan sau and beyond tansau. one can never do the exact tansau twice. so why to do someting impossible ? when you need a tan sau use it. otherwise, just living.

PaulH

11-04-2003, 10:38 AM

Hendrik,

Sometimes ago, I lived in the mountainous Bataan of the Phillipine for a few months where the GI Joes and the Japanese fought in the jungles during WWII. There is a spring there and I always love its cool and refreshing taste. One can feel all sorts of excitements and lively rhythms at this spring. It's always fun to let its rushing water carry you along over its calm and turbulent spots too. The origin of WCK may well be the running water of the everlasting spring.

Regards,

PH

reneritchie

11-04-2003, 02:25 PM

If I'm putting Joy to sleep, I would like it if he would make a medicade claim so I can get some form of recompense... :p

yuanfen

11-04-2003, 03:00 PM

Not always Rene--- sometimes I have one and often enough both open.
But when we get too much beyond Leung Jan about x learning fron z and z from a...my eyes can involuntarily glaze over.
You dont want to get into the medicare paperwork- they might just reimburse with the new $20 bills which many machines dont take perhaps thinking its Canadian currency(?). The Feds spent millions pushing the new bills.

But not too worry--- St Thomas, At Augustine, Duns Scotus, Marx's
Das Kapital, speeches of Spiro Agnew, Fidel Castro(the 2 hour ones), Calvin Coolidge, Jimmy Carter, football commentaries of Dennis Miller and Rush Limbaugh, Gretzky on what is needed for Arizona ice hockey to come alive-are way way ahead of the bad postsin the markers to dreamland. The good ones are superb.

anerlich

11-04-2003, 03:05 PM

how can one reading an operating manual and following a programing flow chart in an open everchanging environment and condition or while riding on top of a wave?

LOL at the mental image that popped into my head on this one. Kelly Slater riding 12 foot pipeline with a book in one hand and an unfolded chart in the other ....

You could juggle three flaming torches, and have a hula hoop going around the waist and a smaller one around one ankle as well ....

anerlich

11-04-2003, 03:12 PM

I'm not trying to hype you or push HFY on the net

That's good, though I suspect its an attitude less than universally held.

Mike Mathews

11-04-2003, 03:30 PM

Ernie,

I have to agree with Alex (Duende). I've had experience with both HFY and YM WC. The approaches are quite different. I can understand your POV that from reading the book you can see the similarities and say yup we've got that or yup I've seen that. The place where I saw the biggest difference is that HFY identifies and develops these ideas with specific exercises like Kiu Sao, and then uses that as part of the strategy and tactics of the system.

Mike

Chango

11-04-2003, 03:47 PM

Rene,black and blue,

B and B wrote: Ps. Chango's posts still make me frown. Regardless of his skills, he still ought to be a little more respectful. He is, after all, a representative of GG.

-- First off I represent myself on this board. As Sifu I not only teach HFY but Chi sim, Wushu and tia Chi. Do I represent them as well? I'm writing these words. So I represent myself only. of course I support my Kung fu family and will defend it anytime it is needed but once again I represent Chango and only Chango so please spare me with the chastising.

Rene spoke with a forked tongue about myself and other VTM and/or HFY members. He constantly does this so every time he does I will call him on it. If that makes you angry well I'm sorry but I cannot help you. If someone tosses you and insult it does not matter if he sugar coats it with false compliments first.

--Rene it is clear you and some others have issues with some using Sifu in thier signature. I'm willing to meet you fellas half way and reframe from doing so. I know it's not my hang up but hey for the sake of furthering the quality of discussion. I will not use it any more:)

Rene wrote: See, if you latch onto a theory and make everything dependant on that (especially if its a business and not just an academic endeavor), you develop far too much attachment, and far too much bias, and it becomes too easy to dismiss or rationalize information that doesn't match your pre-existing theory.

Once again Rene yours and Hendrick "working theories" lack conceptual connections (amoung other flaws) in yours and his so called "working theories". So I think your arguements of " latching on" seems very weak we look beyond a hand movement, technique etc... This is without boring some readers with Who learned form who.

A working anlogy would be you claining someone might be your brother becuase his hair and eyes and nose looks like yours. But the VTM is holding the DNA test results in front of your face.

MR Chango (father, husband, Teacher, student Etc..)

Ernie

11-04-2003, 03:51 PM

mike
no worries , i have not been through the hfy system so can't say it'sexactly the same , as others have not been through what i have seen thus they can't say it's not the same . of course there will be some differences but i look at it from a attribute , tool and range point of view , and what is the end skill you are trying to achieve .

nothing magical if you spend time in a specific range to isolate certian attributes there will be more simularities then differences , especially if your limiting the refrence points , there are only so many ways to move and control position , it's not rocket science

of course the wording might be different , and some body alighnment details might go this way or that depending on were you generate power from , but in the end if it's combative and it's goal is to control ,manipulate , or maintain the correct position , the end skill will be similar .

there might be 100 diffferent ways to throw a jab and to each coach thinks his way is the best but in the end a jab is still a jab , if your goal is to hit some one with it .

but since all i have is the book to base my opinion on nothing new to me , unless they add a magical third arm or leg , the common denominater is still two dudes squaring off , one walks one drops .

Chango

11-04-2003, 05:14 PM

KPM,
I'm sorry to see that you seem to have assume that HFY is identical to some of the other WCK. I have to admit that upon first hearing some of the HFY concepts I assumed the very same things. However I find out more and more as I train almost is not good enough. But I have to tell you that once you start to look further into HFY's approach and how things have a precise nature and Yes precise Time frame and space signature.

You will find that the gounlet is laid when we begain to say Center line or five line etc... "is!" You will find that either it is precise or it does not exist according to the system.

I love the analogy that there is only one center of the room in a three dementional since if off by even an inch in any direction you no longer have the center of the room. using that anology we understand you can share and enjoy some of the same advantages of being the center by being close to the center. But still something is lost. However bing in the center will have it's precise coordinates shared by none other so it will have charecteristics that are not share by anything other then center! So when learning HFY clearity is of extreme importance. This may not be the standard accross the board so if that is the case WE cannot move beyond the assuptions listed in previous post.

Chango (father, husband, teacher, student) :D

Chango

11-04-2003, 05:28 PM

<quote> nothing magical if you spend time in a specific range to isolate certian attributes there will be more simularities then differences , especially if your limiting the refrence points , there are only so many ways to move and control position , it's not rocket science

of course the wording might be different , and some body alighnment details might go this way or that depending on were you generate power from , but in the end if it's combative and it's goal is to control ,manipulate , or maintain the correct position , the end skill will be similar .

there might be 100 diffferent ways to throw a jab and to each coach thinks his way is the best but in the end a jab is still a jab , if your goal is to hit some one with it .

but since all i have is the book to base my opinion on nothing new to me , unless they add a magical third arm or leg , the common denominater is still two dudes squaring off , one walks one drops .

__________________

--- This is an example of what standards are set! From my experiences HFY has a very high standard as to "what is" where as some others have a lower standard as to what is acceptable.
I could be wrong but from this quote it seem one feels that he has seen it all. That may be the case however without context some things may never be understood on a deeper level.

Chango (SGS) :p

Ernie

11-04-2003, 06:37 PM

chango
This is an example of what standards are set! From my experiences HFY has a very high standard as to "what is" where as some others have a lower standard as to what is acceptable.

no this is funny , standerd in regard to what , ???

1one 1 , 2 one 1 , stepping out of you car and getting blind sided and dragged out while some one else is attacking you girl friend ,
having to survive a maximum security prison , weapons , fighting in the snow , sand, water , bar fights ,and so on .

if your telling me you have a set standerd for all that goes on in a street fight well god bless you i'm sure the rest of the world will be on pins and needles waiting for that one .

beware the man that has an answer for everything , either he is god or lieing

as for have i seen everything , well of course not that's why i wouldn't make such a difinitive statement like , [ higher standerd ] that would be silly. but i know enough about attribute development and skill development that i am not easy dazzled by shiney objects.

but this is a sensless exhange of words you don't know what i have seen and i don't know all that you have seen , so like i said i'll wait for the movie

anerlich

11-04-2003, 07:40 PM

This may not be the standard accross the board

If you're talking about an MA that requires absolute precision for effectiveness, then I'm happy in (one of) the other camps.

In some ways I think one of the weaknesses of WC is the obsession with mechanical efficiency and precision, and assuming that these are anything other than one factor in effective defense.

Reality is chaotic. The worst you do in training is the best you can hope for in a real event. Often it's not how precisely you can do the right things, but how quickly you can recover from mistakes or errors (like getting attacked in the first place) that determines whether or not you prevail.

If you reckon you never make mistakes, you already made one ... joining this thread :D

Ultimatewingchun

11-05-2003, 07:57 AM

Ernie wrote: "I know enough about attitude development and skill development that I am not easily dazzled by shiney objects"....

And the HFY approach of constantly trying to dazzle us with INCREDIBLE sounding theory, history, etc. is just not going to work on "all the people all the time".

I'll wait for the movie also...Garrett Gee, Benny Meng, etc. - put out a video that demonstrates how the system works during realistic and high quality fighting scenarios (high quality moves being used against HFY is what I mean)...do that and you will do TEN TIMES MORE to advance respect for your art than a hundred books or 1,000 posts that spout theory or history could ever do.

canglong

11-05-2003, 09:42 AM

originally posted by Anerlich
If you're talking about an MA that requires absolute precision for effectiveness, then I'm happy in (one of) the other camps. I think it would be more accurately described as effectiveness derived through precision.
originally posted by Sifu Victor Parlati
...do that and you will do TEN TIMES MORE to advance respect for your art than a hundred books or 1,000 posts that spout theory or history could ever do. Parlati Sifu, I can't presume to speak for Grand Master Gee or the authors or the many many contributors credited with the writing of Mastering Kung Fu but as a HFY member I know first hand that HFY is a principled based science not a technique driven art and as such I imagine in the effort to bring Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Kuen to the public awareness and understanding are paramount because they can be controlled to some extent by those delivering the message. Respect is not required but usually a natural courtesy extended between two parties humble enough to understand why this is.

Phenix

11-05-2003, 10:58 AM

Originally posted by Chango

Once again Rene yours and Hendrick "working theories" lack conceptual connections (amoung other flaws) in yours and his so called "working theories". So I think your arguements of " latching on" seems very weak we look beyond a hand movement, technique etc... This is without boring some readers with Who learned form who.

Some based thier reality on the facture evidents.
Some based thier reality on imagination.
It is a world fill with different type of people.
Some is living. some is imagine about living according to thier own logic.

CarlDouglas108

11-05-2003, 11:48 AM

Sifu Parlati,

You seem bent on watching HFY on video rather than experiencing it first hand, surely a Sifu with you're years of knowledge would prefer to actually come to a HFY seminar and take part as you have so many questions that you want answered.
Somehow, I don't think just a video will answer the questions you have?.

There is a HFY seminar at the VTM Nov 15th and 16th I look forward to seeing you there?.

Regards

CD

Ultimatewingchun

11-05-2003, 01:37 PM

CarlDouglas:

You can look forward to seeing me there if you're willing to pay for my planefare, room and board, and tuition....

in other words - I would attend a different seminar every week all over the map if I were wealthy - but I'm not...

so make the video available and I'll buy it !!!

I will be looking forward to it.

anerlich

11-05-2003, 02:55 PM

If you're talking about an MA that requires absolute precision for effectiveness, then I'm happy in (one of) the other camps.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think it would be more accurately described as effectiveness derived through precision.

The semantic distinction here eludes me - it still sounds like precision (one inch off the center of the room, yadayadayada) is required for effectiveness - and so I'm still happy in one of the other camps.

Precision is good. Assuming it will always be there when you want it or that it's the only thing you have to have, or that if you have it and the other guy doesn't that victory is assured, is very dangerous IMO.

The video thing got discussed on this or one of the other threads. To recap, USD13 plus shipping for the book is probably a wise investment for me to find out about HFY, AUD5000 plus several weeks off work to go to the source is a very dubious one.

If messrs Gee and Meng want to spread HFY to the world, they need to consider other media as well. There are some very good MA videos out, particularly for BJJ, which put paid to the notion that video instruction cannot work.

There is no frigging way I can justify a trip to the US to check out an art I'm only moderately interested in and some of whose claims I am dubious about. I would be much more inclined to spend around USD 100 on a DVD or video series.

Mike Mathews

11-05-2003, 03:05 PM

Hendrik wrote:

"Finally,

One can claim whatever one likes, but don't screw the WCK opera ancestors and the GMs from different families with they are watery down version empty claims.

Those Ancestors and GMs are similar to the root of WCK, destroy the root will destroy the WCK. one can see what is the result of the Chinese Culture revolution. If you love WCK, don't go down the path of Culture revolution. IMHO.

These WCK opera ancestors and GMs knows what they are teaching. Evidentaly, if they don't know what they are teaching. we don't have this forum today and there is no Bruce Lee or Leong Seong or WSL or Sung Neng or Cho Hung Choi .... in different parts of the world.

IMHO, We might have same ancestors, we might have different. we migh from the reb boat, we might not, That is all respectable.

Hope that we all meditate on these"

>Hendrik - the VTM and members of the HFY lineage have never >disrespected the Masters and Sifus of the Red Boat generation. >Members of the VTM and HFY have recognized many masters of >the Red Boat as very high level and skilled martial artists. It >appears that you are just trying to stir the pot here. Truly, there >is no malicious intent behind any of the writings.

Phenix

11-05-2003, 03:40 PM

Mike,

Do you read this?

"IMHO, We might have same ancestors, we might have different. we migh from the reb boat, we might not, That is all respectable.
Hope that we all meditate on these" ----Hendrik

"It appears that you are just trying to stir the pot here. "-----Mike

LOL. great logic. great accusation.

BTW. May be you can explain this :

in page 42 of Mastering Kungfu, it was written that -----

"the term red bandana referred to be a top leader of society acitivity........

Hung gun biu continous to lead HFY ..... and kept the details of the system closely held among revolutionary members, but a public version was introduced to the opera players, most likely for recruiting purposes. Later on, this public display of wing chun was referred to Hung Suen Wing Chun Kung Fu."

1, So is it claiming HFY is the original of all WCK?

2, How come, in the Written History Qing Dynasty, Red Bandana was invented by Lee Man Mau and his opera memebers due to running out of costumes for the late joiners and Red Bandana is not reffered to be a top leader of society acitivity

3, How come, in the writtern history of Qing Dynasty, It was Lee Man Mau and the Opera members started the uprising before other join in. and there is NO hung gan biu but Lee Man-Mau as the leader of the Red Bandana uprising?

4, as for closely held and public version was introduced to the opera players...... well, when does Hung Gun Biu taught Lee Man Mau ? Or may be you want to prove if even HUng Gun Biu exist? what is his real name? such as Wong Wah Bo..?

Ps. Also please don't give me the answer that at that time everything has to keep very secret because Qing will killed the 9 relatives.... We know Lee Man Mau's name, Qing knows the names of the Shang Hai Small Knife Society's leader's name, Liu even interview with westerners, they know even Sun Yat Sen's name.

A leader and the revolutionaries has to believe what they do and willing to sacrify with all cost. Thus, they stick thier name out. Now, looking back, did Qing Killed all the 9 relatives of CLF's founders who taugh the anti-qing?

on the other hand, the Member of Opera were heros, Keng Fa opera association and red boats got burn down, members killed. Did they expect what will happen when they started -- the first opera members uprising in the 3000 years of china history, lead by Lee Man Mau? They lived in in Qing and they stick thier neck out.

Just my two cents, certainly you can choose to not answer the above questions and starting accuse me, attack me with tons and tons of people..... that I am trying to stir the pot.

But, that doesn't help you to solve the issue that what was written in the book is contradict to the Qing Written history right?
we need evidents not claims, and I can accept I am wrong if someone present the factual evidents to suggest I am wrong. It is all technical. and certainly, you can choose to ignore my question above. it is understandable that you might not think in the same way with me.

Grendel

11-05-2003, 04:14 PM

Originally posted by Mike Mathews

>Hendrik - the VTM and members of the HFY lineage have never >disrespected the Masters and Sifus of the Red Boat generation. >Members of the VTM and HFY have recognized many masters of >the Red Boat as very high level and skilled martial artists. It >appears that you are just trying to stir the pot here. Truly, there >is no malicious intent behind any of the writings.
Mike,

In Hendrik's attempts to defend the ancestors, he is doing the opposite of stirring the pot. He is drawing a line between the reality of history and delusion.

When one is rewriting history, it affronts the ancestors from whom the art of Wing Chun has been handed down.

I wonder how you can have faith in a system which rests its premise on such dubious foundations.

Regards,

CHS

11-05-2003, 10:45 PM

I am really encouraged to see the healthy debates on the information presented by the "Mastering KungFu". May we continue to test each other's theories with concrete proof and information, not claims.

HFY members, can you please reply Phenix's 4 questions?

yuanfen

11-05-2003, 11:17 PM

Originally posted by Mike Mathews

>Hendrik - the VTM and members of the HFY lineage have never >disrespected the Masters and Sifus of the Red Boat generation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
((Stretches the meaning of respect and history as well.
See pp 45-46 . Leung Jan is portrayed as depending on his personal experience and by passing original wing chun philosophy and the science of wing chun etc.....

No real evidence - just a series of assertions about the true and original wing chun which Leung Jan and his predecessors were not privy to.... supposedly.

Respect indeed???!!!

The book is a hodge podge of assertions with buzz words of Chan and science and battlefield thrown in with rants against internet historians
and the need for face to face instruction from the authors of the book of course. .

Lots of folks have received sustained face to face wing chun instruction
longer than the authors of the book.

Then when all is said and done there are adapted TWC like stances and lines, fok and tan and distance from the jong...combined with less than impressive posing with weapons including the biu kwan....mixed in with other postures. Few real concepts---packaging of different things under different labels.

I wouldhave no problem with the postures if they were only the preferences of a lineage- but the book drips with sarcastic remarks about all the wing chun people who missed the real boat.
..the hitherto secret HFY one!!
There is zilch evidence in the book that in his time that a HFY guy knew wing chun which was superior to that of Leung Jan.

Respect indeed!

But if something is repeated enough and advertised enough
there are always people who will buy it.

I couldnt find a $13 copy readily- so I paid $20- will be happy to sell a discounted clean used copy.

Back to caveat emptor.

Ernie

11-06-2003, 12:02 AM

joy
that's why i was happy to only have borrowed the copy i read from a class mate , who by the way is trying to sell his of as well funny huh.

Phenix

11-06-2003, 12:41 AM

Joy, Ernie,

I got the book from amazon.com.

Paying the book to learn about something is fair.
I think it is great to learn about how different people think and thier logic. Certainly, my book has lots and lots of mark up and notes .ect on the material which is contracting to qing history, Chan buddhism, ........ I give it the same treatment as I am reading the Proceeding of Power Conversion conference at Long Beach ---- purely technical.

Well, allow people to make mistakes. hope that everyone learn and become better.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
When I get bored I reform.

duende

11-06-2003, 02:16 AM

****!

Looks like another bash HFY day on KFO. Somethings will never change.

But I'm not going to trade insults with you all. I figure if any of you has a real problem you should just come pay us a visit. And I'm not talking about paying for a seminar.

In HFY, we trace our roots directly to the Southern Saolin temple via our learning methodology Tin Yan Dei Saam Mo Kiu. Coincidentally, Chi Sim WC also shares the same Tin Yan Dei concept. This was a complete surprize to us when we learned of this. With other WC's we share SNT, CK, and BG but you guys have no Kiu Sau. With Chi Sim we share Kiu Sau, but they don't have SNT, CK, and BG, but they have the dummy, and the WC weapons. Also, both Chi Sim and HFY together share other Chan learning concepts.

For me this undisputably links us to the Southern Saolin which predates the Red Boat. I really don't care who's the original, or for any of the politics involved. To get caught up in all that is really just an illusion. A distraction from the true focus of not just training, but actually improving.

Some of you have drawn your own conclusions based on your own self-interpretations of your WC kuen Kuits. Fine.... if that is concrete enough for you.

For me, having experience HFY for years, I can honestly say that Tin Yan Dei is concrete enough for me.

I'll leave the historical details to the VTM.

Alex

Mckind13

11-06-2003, 02:46 AM

Hey Dundee

Maybe it should be bash musician day, mime day or bash the bashers day who knows.

On the other hand, who sais that Chi Sim Weng Chun has it right? Maybe their wing chun is just fabricated like many think HFY is?

Here are some questions...

Is Chi Sim a linear progression from Shaolin to the art we see today or is it an amalgamation of several systems that was then named Chi Sim Weng Chun?

Besides the historical/fictional figure, where do we see Chi Sim or for that matter Hung Fai Yi in the history books. Chi Sim was not secret, how far back can we trace that name and specific lineage holders of the art of CS Weng Chun.

You say HFY shares the same term Kiu Sao with Chi Sim and yet I have seen both methods demonstrated and aside from the name, they seem to have less in common then Yip Man Chi Sao and HFY Kiu Sao.

Thanks for your time.

David

yuanfen

11-06-2003, 05:40 AM

HFY person sez and reply in brackets:

Looks like another bash HFY day on KFO.

((No Ip Man/YKS/KL book exists which bashes HFY. The original bashing is by HFY folks in articles, forums and now the book))

But I'm not going to trade insults with you all. I figure if any of you has a real problem with me or HFY you should just come pay us a visit. And I'm not talking about paying for a seminar.

((I really dont have a problem with what is taught at a HFY school
to students who enroll there in HFY- I for one have mentioned that several times.

it is reasonable to expect responses when it is maintained in discussions and - now in the book- that Leung Jan, Ip man etc misseda turn in the road and merely express their experiences and do not have central reliable concepts. You are doing that even now below in saying- that you guys(wc folks) dont have this or that. Just discussing what you do rather than pushing the original/conceptually superior agenda would goa long ways to civil conversations))

In HFY, we trace our roots directly to the Southern Saolin temple via our learning methodology Tin Yan Dei Saam Mo Kiu.

((if you say so as ideology or religious belief thats one level. No problem. As history it's just a lineage story)

With other WC's we share SNT, CK, and BG but you guys have no Kiu Sau.

((Good IM is very much aware of the role of the bridge and what to do with it--- asa a matter of fact- there is the form- chum kiu.

The pictures of kiu sao shown in the book are not impressive
or specially insightful.

One takes bits of TWC(T stance, wide stance, toes out, add some terminology in Chinese, throw in buzz words- Shaolin, Chan, claim uniqueness in understanding the bridge, use the IM model of the jong, claim it as original and better CMA, bash other people on the net while havinga net push-presto, claim a long lineage when beyond the current leader who came to the US as teen ager and the one pic of a predecessor is a fuzzy computer graphical image and a hand drawn pic and nothing else beyond -
presto-there is a new shiny package or stew on the market. Just having a deluge of same old HFY comments does not make a group ideology into truth))

black and blue

11-06-2003, 06:09 AM

Round 1 to Yuanfen... clearly ahead on points.

:)

But you know Chango is going to step in for Round 2, hehehe.

Lets each believe what we want to believe and leave it at that. You know, Rene Ritchie's line of WCK is different from YM's too... but I don't think I've ever heard him put down YM's art... same goes for Jim R.

:rolleyes:

yuanfen

11-06-2003, 07:04 AM

Round 1 to Yuanfen... clearly ahead on points.
((Who is counting?))

But you know Chango is going to step in for Round 2, hehehe.

((Unlikely good luck- may prefer same old things and group think on the HFY Forum-
good place to discuss HFY it seems to me))

Lets each believe what we want to believe and leave it at that. You know, Rene Ritchie's line of WCK is different from YM's too... but I don't think I've ever heard him put down YM's art... same goes for Jim R.

(On this forum- true. Except for HFY airs and Victor's occasional rants and some chest thumpings we really have not been in into ideologically based group think and lineage bashing.))

canglong

11-06-2003, 07:26 AM

originally posted by yuanfen
One takes bits of TWC(T stance, wide stance, toes out, add some terminology in Chinese, throw in buzz words- Shaolin, Chan, claim uniqueness in understanding the bridge, use the IM model of the jong, claim it as original and better CMA, bash other people on the net while havinga net push-presto, claim a long lineage when beyond the current leader who came to the US as teen ager and the one pic of a predecessor is a fuzzy computer graphical image and a hand drawn pic and nothing else beyond - With the evidence of history that currently exist this statement could be a justified comparison of any wing chun lineage, yet this simplified self indulging biased portrail of MKF sounds surprising coming from even you. Joy, for all the times you yourself have stated "the devil is in the details" you must mean that for every system but HFY because your misrepresentation is lacking a lot ot things but most importantly detail.

Ultimatewingchun

11-06-2003, 07:30 AM

Just when I was about to also award round one to Yuanfen he blasts me...but I should have seen it coming in the way he keeps saying that HFY is just repackaged TWC (which he then describes in very unglowing terms, ie. TWC's toes are out, etc.)...

Firstly, TWC is VERY GOOD, whether Yuanfen wants to admit it or not (and his subtle but jealous nature would never allow that)...

and Secondly, I don't believe that Garrett Gee simply stole TWC and repackaged it, as I've said numerous times....however...

Thirdly, Garrett Gee and Co. bring themselves nothing but enmity from other wing chun folks because they make all kinds of claims that either can't be backed up (ie.- their alleged history - and Gee's history)...or that WON'T be backed up... because that would expose the art as human (as opposed to superhuman)...

and once again I'll say that without a video with some REAL DEAL fighting sequences on it Gee, Meng and co. will still be regarded as a fringe element within the Wing Chun world at best...

SO SHOW US THE BEEF...before we all die of HFY boredom !!!

Phil Redmond

11-06-2003, 07:42 AM

Victor, Yuanfen should have written, toes straight ;)
I have NEVER seen a professional fighter fight pigeon toed. You could not maintain that position long during the dynamics of a real fight. If anyone has please correct me. Even WSL is not pigeon toed in his video.

yuanfen

11-06-2003, 08:37 AM

Phil sez:
I have NEVER seen a professional fighter fight pigeon toed. You could not maintain that position long during the dynamics of a real fight. If anyone has please correct me. Even WSL is not pigeon toed in his video.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Phil-
Different lines have different degrees of toe and knee abduction.
It is for developmental purposes in slt. Once some structural attributes are internally and habitually in place all kinds of dynamic toe positions emerge in the bot jam do work and in actual applications.

Pro fighters uses a different body structure- top heavy- loading the shoulders. Different fighters have different foot positions
depending on whether they are speedsters or heavy hitters etc.
Development of specific attributes and general fighting are not the same thing. A pro fighter can hold his hands for speed bag work differently than in fighting.

On WSL -see Ip Ching's book on his father and the private collection pics- it has good shot at a younger wsl standing in ygkym. I have seen him in person doing the slt twice- with toes a
ittle in and feet not quite as broadly spaced as in the Ip Ching
book.

I have a couple of students who just cant do the ygkym with toes/knees in--one has a very stiff ankle, the other a damaged knee. I leave them at their comfort level and have them achieve the functions in adifferent way...by adjusting other connections including the kua.

Jim Roselando

11-06-2003, 08:45 AM

Hey guys!

After reading much into this HFY topic (that unfortunately still goes on) I notice one thing that seems to be used as one of their supporters back up which would be the Jee Shim connection!

Now, just to make things interesting I thought I would bring this up and its not meant to be disrespectfull but to have more food for thought.

Since Jee Shim was reported to have been killed by Bak Mei would that mean Bak Mei Kung Fu is superior to Jee Shim Kung Fu?

Personally I dont buy into these 5 elder stories but for those who do wouldn't it be important to know that piece of info. and what kind of impact does it have on your beliefs now?

Things that make you go hmmmmm!

;)

Regards,

Mckind13

11-06-2003, 09:09 AM

Didn't I just ask that :P

David

PaulH

11-06-2003, 09:18 AM

While it is true that much of the controversial historical inunendos start first by the MK book, there is no point to go back and forth chasing after illusions and shadows of the historical past. In the present time, I commend the authors for presenting good diagrams illustrating the vertical and horizontal lines which are the backbone of the WC structures as well as those of triangle and pyramidal shapes. Some of my si hings also like the excellent glossary of terms and concepts in Chinese and English. It is unfortunate that with so much promising raw materials at hand, the book seemingly dwells on comparative discussion. We should compare systems to generate insights and not more rancours. If you are good you let the facts speak for themselves, there is no need for comparison.

Regards,

PH

Phenix

11-06-2003, 09:42 AM

Originally posted by duende
****!

In HFY, we trace our roots directly to the Southern Saolin temple via our learning methodology Tin Yan Dei Saam Mo Kiu. Coincidentally, Chi Sim WC also shares the same Tin Yan Dei concept.

This was a complete surprize to us when we learned of this. With other WC's we share SNT, CK, and BG but you guys have no Kiu Sau. With Chi Sim we share Kiu Sau, but they don't have SNT, CK, and BG, but they have the dummy, and the WC weapons.

Also, both Chi Sim and HFY together share other Chan learning concepts.

For me this undisputably links us to the Southern Saolin which predates the Red Boat. I really don't care who's the original, or for any of the politics involved. To get caught up in all that is really just an illusion. A distraction from the true focus of not just training, but actually improving.

Some of you have drawn your own conclusions based on your own self-interpretations of your WC kuen Kuits. Fine.... if that is concrete enough for you.

For me, having experience HFY for years, I can honestly say that Tin Yan Dei is concrete enough for me.

I'll leave the historical details to the VTM.

Alex

"you guys have no Kiu Sau. With Chi Sim we share Kiu Sau" -----ALEX

LOL. Flip the New Hero of the 1970's, you can see there were all the place. WSL discuss about under Kiu hand..Kiu Dai Sau...... The Yik Kam had a Chi Lin Wan Kiu (stick chain bridge) The Jong Kiu Sau.....

Please do your homework before you making claim. Make sure you understand WCK Praise the Spring and not confuse or reference other style with Praise the Spring.

BTW,

in page 26.
it said : This Heaven, man, and earth orientation is the original language which expresses time, space, and energy in shaolin chan.....

May be you can help to explain what is the reason:

Tin Yan Dei is a concept from I Ching or book of Change. and Now in the book it becomes the original language which experesses time..... in Shao Lin Chan?

Certainly, again, you can choose to ignore the above question, and it is understandable since different people think differently.

Ernie

11-06-2003, 10:12 AM

hendrik
[[LOL. Flip the New Hero of the 1970's, you can see there were all the place. WSL discuss about under Kiu hand..... The Yik Kam had a Chi Lin Wan Kiu (stick chain bridge) The Jong Kiu Sau..... ]]]

exactly , that's way i said nothing new , the '' bridge range '' is just one of the three ranges we study indepth , we isolate it and work on entering and passing it as well as controlling position , nothing new and i sure other families do it in there own way , don't see what the big deal is ,
one drill, idea, range what ever is no more important then another you must be skilled at all , not over emphisize one then you become a lopsided fighter useing favoritism instead of natural adaptability .

if something has been battle tested and holds up under pressure guess what other people will have it to , no big deal

Phenix

11-06-2003, 10:13 AM

Hi Jim,

Ng Mui, ofcause survive the Bak Mei and go back to Fujian and live happily there after. :D

Well, it is similar to 5 people starts an Inc.

now, it happen that people wants to take over the share holding of Ng Mui.

Phenix

11-06-2003, 10:18 AM

Ernie,

see, Factual evidents speak for itself. 1970's is 30 years ago.

duende

11-06-2003, 10:39 AM

Joy,

Kiu Sau in HFY is expressed in the second section of our SNT. FWIW, I never noticed much anti-grappling technique in your Chum Kiu, but if you think there is fine.

Seems like people here don't like me pointing out our differences. Or two people here to be more specific.

Joy, like Sifu Redmond said... you got your goat feet we don't.

And Hendrik, you have all your White Crane Kuen Kuits... and forms I've never heard of. But if it makes you feel better to say you have everything fine.

The MKF is once again meant as an intro to HFY. All the theory and applications could not possibly fit in the pages we were limited to.

BTW, I've yet to see either of you have any experience in HFY Kiu Sau... funny how you claim to know so much about it.

Mckind 13,

If GM Hoffman and GM Gee see the parallels between their two lineages, I see no reason why you shouldn't.

Phenix

11-06-2003, 11:37 AM

Originally posted by duende

And Hendrik, you have all your White Crane Kuen Kuits... and forms I've never heard of. But if it makes you feel better to say you have everything fine.

The MKF is once again meant as an intro to HFY. All the theory and applications could not possibly fit in the pages we were limited to.

Alex,

don't shift the focus. LOL. New Hero is a public domain media.

There sure are lots or lots of things you never heard of which Joy, Rene,... Ernie.... lots of people in this forum have seen.:D
As for White Crane... You dont like Ng Mui, I take it.

If you don't want to answer the questions I post above, be so.
As I mention before, attacking me or accusing me is not going to solve your problems of inconsistancy and contradiction to facts.

BTW,

in page 65. it said,

"popular wing chun kung fu,,,,,,,, the ultimate expression is determined by each individual based on mastery, personality..... and sometimes blind loyalties..... even in the popular wing chun system there are many variations and each new generation will modify the system according to its interpretation and preceived loyalties.......
........ is the only martial art system to ultimately reach maximum levels of efficiency...."

When WSL was Kong Sau in HK, Sung Num was Kong Sau in Canton, Cho Hung Choy was Kung Sau in Penang,... and all others including Gu Lao.....

Was that blind faith of loyality to thier sifu of WCK?
or WCK Praise Spring Works?

Do they have to wait for the ultimate reach maximum levels of efficiency system for rescue? Where is the Ultimate Reach maximum levels..... system then while they were Kong Sau for WCK praise the spring?

page 46, it said,

"No fighter in the modern era trained harder then Bruce in search of that experience. Like the monks, he too was looking for ultimate efficency in hand to hand combat. consequently, he tried to look beyond the known systems of his time (Hung Fa Yi was only practiced secretly could not give him that ultimate level of combat efficiency)....."

May you please explain what do the authors mean here?

BTW, does HFY created figthers who always win in Kong Sau such as the late GMs above and Bruce? who were they?

11-06-2003, 11:43 AM

Originally posted by yuanfen
I couldnt find a $13 copy readily- so I paid $20- will be happy to sell a discounted clean used copy.

Hi Joy,

If you still have and are willing to part with it, I'll be glad to make you an offer.

Regards,
- Kathy Jo

yuanfen

11-06-2003, 12:17 PM

Notes on Duende post in brackets:

Joy,

Kiu Sau in HFY is expressed in the second section of our SNT. FWIW, I never noticed much anti-grappling technique in your Chum Kiu, but if you think there is fine.

((Chum Kiu has specific and considerable developmental objectives- it is not justa collection of techniques. What you "see"
is just your perception))

Seems like people here don't like me pointing out our differences. Or two people here to be more specific.

((Differences-da superiority-nyet)

Joy, like Sifu Redmond said... you got your goat feet we don't.

((Diffrent choice of words from Phil and you wonder about civility))

All the theory and applications could not possibly fit in the pages we were limited to.

((i didnt see much theory. More a series os assertions))

BTW, I've yet to see either of you have any experience in HFY Kiu Sau... funny how you claim to know so much about it.

(( We dont do it per page 137 pic- but the concept is no stranger))

anerlich

11-06-2003, 03:55 PM

If you are good you let the facts speak for themselves, there is no need for comparison.

PaulH hit the nail on the head.

OTOH if you go in for comparison, you've got no right to expect those on the wrong side of your opinion to just shut up and take it. And if you insist on ramming it down their throats, don't act all offended when they spew it back up all over you.

anerlich

11-06-2003, 04:05 PM

FWIW, I never noticed much anti-grappling technique in your Chum Kiu, but if you think there is fine.

I've not notice much "anti-grappling technique" in anyone's Chum Kil, and as a grappler of some experience I'll bet the farm there ain't much of consequence in yours either.

"anti-grappling technique" - people keep trying to tell me it's about principles not techniques, but whatever ...

Chum Kil has a number of grappling techniques in it - collar choke, arm drag, cutting armbar, reaping throws, guilotine choke, several throws by neck manipulation to name just a few. But very little in the way of "antigrappling" that will actually work off paper or a forum post.

anerlich

11-06-2003, 04:12 PM

Factual evidents speak for itself. 1970's is 30 years ago.

Duh, the 1970's ended about 24 years ago, O great demander of historical accuracy and factual evidence.

I wish they were further away too, as a hater of flared pants and disco.

yuanfen

11-06-2003, 04:41 PM

Hi Joy,

If you still have and are willing to part with it, I'll be glad to make you an offer.

Regards,
----------------------------------------------------------------

Will be in the mail by Monday!!
Thanks for asking.
Regards, Joy

anerlich

11-06-2003, 04:46 PM

Victor and Phil are correct about TWC, and while yuanfen's comments sailed a bit close to the edge it's probably fair game on a thread where insults are lying thick and fast in all directions.

I've though about this more in recent times: boxers do occasionally transition through a "toes-in" position, though in their case it's more "heel out" on the toes of the back foot. Turning on the ball of the foot for hooks or to align the drive of the calf with the cross often move one through the "toes in" position momentarily. I know it's not the same thing or same emphasis, but I can see some advantages to the concept.

Of course, the parallel stance is strictly a training stance and no one stands like that in a defense situation. Unless they do it different in HFY, though I have little interest in what they do with it.

In the beginning I was enthused at the apparent similarities between TWC and HFY. These days I'm much less keen to see an association. TWC stands proud on its own, requiring no assocation with anyone else's lineage for legitimacy.

I'd be annoyed if people started saying "TWC? Oh, yeah, it's like that stuff in that book by Garrett Gee and Benny Meng."

TWC deserves better.

For an extra-lively VTM seminar, next time Sigung Cheung visits the VTM, someone should suggest to him that the concepts of HFY are more and better and more original than what he does, as has been implied on here (not specifically to TWC, but generally to all other lineages).

I'd almost consider a return plane fare from Oz to attend THAT seminar.

Chango

11-06-2003, 05:59 PM

Hello ladies and Gents and other,
I'm quite amused by this round one and round two business! A debate is not my goal when posting. I had seen that Rene has changed his thinking and wanted to know what set the spark for his new thinking. As I suspected it was not based on anything new but more on likes or dislike or even could be agenda driven at this point who knows. I felt that was not going any where so I left the subject. My goal was not to win or loose anything here.

I have decided a long time ago some of the people on here have choosen sides one way or the other and do not seek truth. Some even go as far as to post on every HFY related post debating anything that is presented. (man, I wish I had that kind of free time) Maybe it 's pride, ego or something else who knows? But For those who are really interested in learning about Shaolin Wing /Weng Chun I'm here for you. For those who have nothing better to do with thier time but set behind a PC screen and practicing thier Internet Kung fu I have to say I rather spend my time devloping real skills.

Having first hand experiences with GM Gee and GM Hoffman. It is safe for me to say that Shaolin Wing/Weng Chun (both HFY and CS) does not seek to attack any other lineage. So I don't see hy someone would feel the need to continue to attack these stystems.

The VTM has just laid out glimspe of both lineages and the logic flow that come from both systems. Both GM's can see Chan in both lineages DNA. Regardless of your points of views on many things of these systems I cannot say I can think of anyone more qualified to determine the connection beyond the GM's of these systems.

Chango (the man)