Nope that is not true.

[Hendrik]

WCK is a fighting method; you can prove whether your "interpretation" is valid, whether your mechanics work more effectively, whether your strategy is sound or not, etc. ----




The world going through 2 waves of evolutions in the past 100 years.

The invention of the automobile and industrial revolution starting about 100 years ago.

The invention of personal computer and internet or communication revolution era which started in 1970's.


Even today's internet wave has the seed and the image of the industrial revolution, those things doesnt totally die off.


What is the reality about the evolution or revolution be it globar or local was in-print in the DNA. And it is not upto intepretation.

A circuit schematic of a Cell phone will be read the same whether it is in Silicon valley or in China or in India or in Africa for production.

---------- Just read the DNA and one will know what is what and what can do what.



As for who can be Bill Gate or the best fighter of the world. That is not the topic of studying the DNA.

And, there is no such thing to 100% guarentee to be Bill Gate or Mohamad ALI based on DNA.

WCK is engineering.
until everyone doesnt confuse PCM and PWM, AM and FM, CDMA or GSM nothing is not "your intepretation"
and non of those intepretation are engineering at all but VOODOO intepretation. :D

anyone can and certainly encourage todesign thier own cell phone, as soon as they know the solid engineering. not hoping those VOODOO intepretation will get them to the moon.

[t_niehoff]

Hendrik,

WCK is not a dead, inflexible thing-- it is an alive, changeable, evolving approach toward fighting and a means of training that approach. I don't use a certain body-structure simply because so-and-so tells me it is "correct" (what if they are wrong?) or has a certain DNA (btw, I think that whole metaphor is flawed) or because others in the past have used it but because it works best **for me** -- most effectively -- in using the tools of my method. How do I determine it works best? By following Yip Man's advice: "Go out and test it for yourself, I may be tricking you." Maybe you're tricking me. Maybe the HFY people are tricking me. Maybe Robert is tricking me. How do I *know*? By testing it. And guess what? If something works well for me that doesn't make it "right" or "definitive" because it may not work well for someone else or they may have something that works better for them. And if I find a better way **for me** than my predecessors used, does that mean I should for tradition's sake only use a less effective way?

Terence

[Jim Roselando]

Hey guys,


Terence,


We have spoke about this in the past but we still need to look at certain things IMO. Just because someone can fight with something does that make it WCK if it no longer holds the key traits of the art that help power it? Just because Terence can use his way of WCK does that mean its WCK? Of course we know WCK is not dead but there are certain reasons for certain things and the more we just go with the stuff we can use and forget the hard work to develop the core engine then the further the art will die IMO.

Just look at the body structure. While it may be much easier to stabalize or generate heavy power early on if things get wider or bigger it sacrifices a key element of WCK boxing! The wider the horse the less shock force one can produce. There is no denying that. The more distance the energy has to travel thru the body the more time it has to disolve in the body. It ends up as long power versus short shock ging. The old guys and their methods were ultra compact. Compact for a few reasons and one would be for the energy the body can produce. So, does it make the art dead if one uses the art as it was used in the mid 1800's or in a compact way? We all evolve and so will the art but the further we go away from some of the key elements the further we go away from WCK core engine.

Going out and testing it is an important part of the training. If we dont fight other guys from outside our art what good is it. Yet! We are humans and the human body is not a car, computer or something that has changed that much in the past X ammount of years. Whats happening now a days is we are taking the Ferrari and turning it back into the Model T.

Dont get me wrong! I agree with you that we need to use it for ourselves and what the old guys did doesn't matter if we cant use it but we must look to those guys for guidence and do it for ourselves in a modern way. WCK was a modern development for our body. One beauty is that it helps cut down the time one would need to cultivate the body powers compared to some other arts that may take a few years longer. Part of Leung Jan final design was to speed up the cultivation process. Yet! Some stuff there is no short cut. Is there a faster way to change the tendons and sinews? Is there a faster way to learn how to slow down and breath to make it natural? You just have to do it and some are not willing. The platform doesn't mean didly IMO. That has been evolving since the beginning yet all that stuff takes some time but now a days everyone uses terms Evolve or Alive in odd ways. Sure! We can indeed use modern stuff to help us grow but just because someone can fight it does not mean its the WCK idea. Maybe, since you believe;

And if I find a better way **for me** than my predecessors used, does that mean I should for tradition's sake only use a less effective way?


This is fine if your interests is just fighting no matter what you use and thats great but we should not regard "tradition" or "what the predecessors used as less effective" if we never spent the time to cultivate it and see how it works or what it develops. Just because we want to do WCK maybe its not the art for us if we need to keep changing the core to make it fit us. I am only 5' 6" tall. I may like Long Fist but it may not be good for me and if I need to learn long fist and keep changing it to fit me then I should look into something different or just call it what it is. Eclectic Long Fist. It may look like Long Fist but is it really long fist if it doesn't use the Long Fist engine?


These are just my opinions and I may be right or I may be wrong!


Gotta walk,

[PaulH]

Good discussion, guys! I enjoy Hendrik's talks mostly because I got lot of insights of what I do now. Short Jing is what I would call power point usage today. Thanks!

[t_niehoff]

Jim,

Why did our ancestors develop those "key traits" in the first place? Because these were effective means of using the tools (tan, bong, fook, etc.) to implement our method (strategy), not to adhere to tradition. To adhere to tradition and get second-rate results is silly. Do you *believe* that you have an effective means to use WCK's tools and strategy? Maybe it will stand up, maybe it won't. How do you know they work? How do you know that you are getting the "real deal"? The only way to know is by putting them to the test. And if I find, for example, that a wider horse works better for me (makes me a more effective fighter) should I not use it and be a less effective fighter just to conform to what you believe is good WCK? Wong had a great quote about using WCK and not letting it use you.

I don't use something because some ancestor *perhaps* (and we have no way of knowing for sure) could make it work for him or because my teacher says this is how it should be done but because I can make it work for *me* (and tell me, what good is the "traditional" if it doesn't work for me?). Has the "essence" of boxing eroded because folks no longer fight like John L. Sullivan? Is the DNA mutated? Please. What I hear from you is how great this "old guy approach" is -- how superior it is. Then ***show me the results, Jim***. Go fight some MMAs or others that have fighting skill and show everyone how good what you call "the old way" is. If it doesn't produce results, it is just more of the same.

Regards,

Terence

[Jim Roselando]

Hey Terence,


Why did our ancestors develop those "key traits" in the first place? Because these were effective means of using the tools (tan, bong, fook, etc.) to implement our method (strategy), not to adhere to tradition. To adhere to tradition and get second-rate results is silly.

There ya go! Second rate results may be what you feel the info. produces but I feel different. It just takes some hard work just like anything. Its all about the individual and how hard they work at what they are taught. JR

Do you *believe* that you have an effective means to use WCK's tools and strategy? Maybe it will stand up, maybe it won't. How do you know they work? How do you know that you are getting the "real deal"? The only way to know is by putting them to the test.

Terence come on. The only way to know is to use it against others. This is nothing new. JR

And if I find, for example, that a wider horse works better for me (makes me a more effective fighter) should I not use it and be a less effective fighter just to conform to what you believe is good WCK?

Thats cool Terence but did you ever spend the time to cultivate the compact body and see what results that produces? I am not saying it will work better for you! It may not but what Iam saying is by making the body wider and better suited for you then you end up losing out on certain things. Its still a form of WCK. JR

Wong had a great quote about using WCK and not letting it use you.

And he is right. It all has to burn into your natural ways so we are not some robotic patternized drones. JR

I don't use something because some ancestor *perhaps* (and we have no way of knowing for sure) could make it work for him or because my teacher says this is how it should be done but because I can make it work for *me* (and tell me, what good is the "traditional" if it doesn't work for me?).

I agree and disagree. While we were not there to watch those guys fight we can most certain see that those guys would not have taught us something that was so opposite of what may come out in reality. It may not be pretty. I may not be as compact. It may be a lot of things but to issue and recieve the force with Short Inch Force and other things one will need to not be so far away from its core engine that we spend so many years training. Do you train your body so differenlty from how you try to use it? Whats the difference then? You like to train SNT with Robert's body structure. I like to train mine with compact structure. We both use it reasonably similar to how we train. Now! Point number two. What good is tradition if it doesn't work for me! Excellent point! Well, maybe this isn't the art for you? Maybe this art is designed better for people with a different structure? But! If it is something you love and do need to make big changes so it works for you then just call it what it is. Thats just my opinion!

Has the "essence" of boxing eroded because folks no longer fight like John L. Sullivan? Is the DNA mutated? Please. What I hear from you is how great this "old guy approach" is -- how superior it is. Then ***show me the results, Jim***. Go fight some MMAs or others that have fighting skill and show everyone how good what you call "the old way" is. If it doesn't produce results, it is just more of the same.

Oh Terence! You just dont get what I am saying. All I am saying is that there are certain key qualities that the so-called "old ways" cultivate and that is just a fact! The further we change and change and change goes further aways from those key attributes. Just that simple. I have tested my art against BJJ guys, Filipino guys, Thai etc.. Boston has a good community for that sort of thing. I am not out there to be some master or anything. I dont even consider myself good! Yup! Thats right! I have seen good and know I am not there! I do care about developing myself and sharing the art. So, while you are still talking about just fighting with whatever I believe one should spend a bit of time and cultivate the engine. Maybe it wont work for them! Thats ok. Maybe it will. In the end it will be the individual that makes the difference. But! Just because something produces some results it does not mean its WCK and just because something looks or talks like its old and cant be used then what good is that? We all know we must be able to use our stuff otherwise whats the point of doing it. You dont see me saying; Hey! TN, you said your wider is better! Go fight some MMA guys. I should hope those who train any art takes the time to test it out. That should be a given! Do you really think we would be doing this stuff if it didn't work for us?

I appreciate this chat!


Regards,

[Hendrik]

When the summarized of LJ WCK passed to Yip Man then to Ciu then to his student written clearly that Ch@n as the ultimate teaching of WCK but cannot be discussed about or even bring up.

When the teaching of Ch@n cannot be clearify, to understand , to study the relationship, the reason behind ...., the influence on the sets...... but can be used as Great answer to cover all HIS-STORY.

When the DNA is not allowed to be examined and disect and fully analized


Where is WCK?

Sink under the river of Canton the night the Qing Ambush the fine jade association.

let it be.

Time to leave the land of Qing.

[taltos]

And here we go again. The thread had some good points, and now it too is threatened because someone can't seem to follow a simple rule.

THERE IS NOTHING STOPPING YOU FROM STARTING A THREAD ON ONE OF THE OTHER FORUMS. PLEASE DON'T DRAG OTHER THREADS DOWN.

-Levi

[PaulH]

I'm sure that it was just one of those fateful days when Sandman walked into his office and confronted his meddlesome Chan once too often. He did not hesitate long. Faster than a snap of his fingers, he cheerily nuked the last of the Chan and thus helped to bring about the new birth of Wing Chunism! Boy, You will never know true WCK again! =)

[yylee]

Originally posted by Hendrik
let it be.


just before you start singing the Paul McCartney song.....

Every time you raise Chan this Chan that, people get little nutty. Call you boring, living in the past, la la la.....

Seems like the immovable heart is no where to be found, a few words from a virtual world can drive people nuts ;)

And here they talk about their Shaolin roots, while over the other side of the pacific ocean the Shaolin official web site is stating: "to train Shaolin Kung Fu is to achieve the immovable heart".

let it be, let it be....

[KPM]

Hi Terence!

Why did our ancestors develop those "key traits" in the first place? Because these were effective means of using the tools (tan, bong, fook, etc.) to implement our method (strategy), not to adhere to tradition. To adhere to tradition and get second-rate results is silly.

---For me personally, if I got second rate results my first thought would be that I need to train more and work harder, not that Leung Jan's traditional teaching was somehow flawed. KPM

And if I find, for example, that a wider horse works better for me (makes me a more effective fighter) should I not use it and be a less effective fighter just to conform to what you believe is good WCK?

---If you came from a background in TKD prior to learning WCK and found that a high roundhouse kick to the head still worked better for you, would it be OK to incorporate and call it "WCK"? Even though it violates several basic principles of the art? KPM

Has the "essence" of boxing eroded because folks no longer fight like John L. Sullivan? Is the DNA mutated?

---"Boxing" is a general term just like "Gung Fu" is a general term. The style of Sullivan and the other old fighters is typically referred to as "pugilism" or "bare knuckle" boxing and is considered as a separate style from modern boxing. There are even groups today working to revive the old boxing style as a self-defense method. So in answer to your question...modern boxing is now a different animal than the older version. Not eroded, but certainly a different style. And the "DNA", has been significantly "mutated" or changed in response to the needs of the rules imposed on the sport. KPM

---Shouldn't someone with an "anything goes as long as it works for me" mentality be doing JKD? :-)

Keith

[t_niehoff]

Hi Keith,

---For me personally, if I got second rate results my first thought would be that I need to train more and work harder, not that Leung Jan's traditional teaching was somehow flawed. KPM

**The "teaching" is the training, not the application: application is always individual. One can't learn application -- how to actually fight -- from a sifu; you learn that on your own by fighting. Mechanics or tactics that work for one person may, for many different reasons, not work as well, or at all, for another. We are not human copy machines. If you study Yip Man WCK, you are not learning how to fight like Yip Man, you are learning a training approach Yip favored.

**But you raise an interesting point -- how people often persist in doing something that are not producing results for them. Do you just persist following "Leung Jan's traditional teachings" because you **believe or hope** that they will someday produce results? Have you met anyone that has successfully fought skilled opponents using this stuff? Or is it all faith-based?

---If you came from a background in TKD prior to learning WCK and found that a high roundhouse kick to the head still worked better for you, would it be OK to incorporate and call it "WCK"? Even though it violates several basic principles of the art? KPM

**Principles are not like the ten commandments, things carved in stone, never to be questioned, never to be violated. They are guides there *to help us* not to constrain us ("you must follow the law or the WCK God will be displeased!"). And I don't follow these concepts just because someone tells me they are useful; I determine their usefulness for myself through my experience fighting. If the concept is valid, won't it provide guidence that permits be to better use my WCK tools? Certainly you won't adhere to some principle or concept that doesn't help you just because someone told you to, would you? So, in a nutshell, I don't avoid using roundhouse kicks to the head because you or someone else tells me it is poor WCK, I avoid it because I appreciate, from fighting, why that isn't a good idea; I have validated the concept for myself (and come to understand it better through experience). And see below about the "tools" of WCK.

---"Boxing" is a general term just like "Gung Fu" is a general term. The style of Sullivan and the other old fighters is typically referred to as "pugilism" or "bare knuckle" boxing and is considered as a separate style from modern boxing. There are even groups today working to revive the old boxing style as a self-defense method. So in answer to your question...modern boxing is now a different animal than the older version. Not eroded, but certainly a different style. And the "DNA", has been significantly "mutated" or changed in response to the needs of the rules imposed on the sport. KPM

**My point is that boxing has evolved, and continues to evolve. Things that are alive do evolve. It evolves because folks are actually using it, in application, and in so doing, continually testing and recreating the art for themselves. Same with BJJ, muay thai, wrestling, MMA, any fighting art. You never have anyone else's WCK; you only ever have your own. Dead things don't evolve; they stay the same. Is your WCK alive or dead, Keith?

---Shouldn't someone with an "anything goes as long as it works for me" mentality be doing JKD? :-)

**It is not the case of "anything goes." WCK has a core: the tools (bong, tan, YJKYM, etc.). And each MA has its own tools. BJJ and WCK, for example, have a different set of tools for doing different jobs. Specific tools can only effectively be used to do certain types of jobs. How well we use those tools, determines our skill. If you say the tools should only be used like this (how you think they work) but can't fight well with them, does that make you right even if you are following tradition? If someone else uses the tools differently that what you think is good WCK but can fight well, does that mean they are doing "some other art"?

**I see a lot of WCK fascism: "I have the "superior" blood, all other races are inferior. If you aren't doing like me and my brood, you are doing something foreign and you should be expelled." This is the sentiment of nonfighters -- it's all BS, theory, conjecture, etc. WCK is an approach toward fighting (with the tools to implement that approach) and a means of training it. Adhering to "doctrine" because it is "doctrine" will not produce good results. If it is good, then it will stand up to testing. If not, we need to find a better way for ourselves (as individuals) to make it stand up. Skill in WCK isn't determined by how closely I can ape Leung Jan or my sifu, but by how well *I* can fight using WCK's tools.

Regards,

Terence

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by yylee
just before you start singing the Paul McCartney song.....


Seems like the immovable heart is no where to be found, a few words from a virtual world can drive people nuts ;)

And here they talk about their Shaolin roots, while over the other side of the pacific ocean the Shaolin official web site is stating: "to train Shaolin Kung Fu is to achieve the immovable heart".

let it be, let it be....

I wont sing the let it be . hahahaha.
instead Paul Simon's the sound of silence is better



Hello darkness, my old friend,
I've come to talk with you again,
Because a vision softly creeping,
Left its seeds while I was sleeping,
And the vision that was planted in my brain
Still remains
Within the sound of silence.
In restless dreams I walked alone
Narrow streets of cobblestone,
'Neath the halo of a street lamp,
I turned my collar to the cold and damp
When my eyes were stabbed by the flash of a neon light
That split the night
And touched the sound of silence.

And in the naked light I saw
Ten thousand people, maybe more.
People talking without speaking,
People hearing without listening,
People writing songs that voices never share
And no one dare
Disturb the sound of silence.


And the people bowed and prayed
To the neon god they made.
And the sign flashed out its warning,
In the words that it was forming.
And the sign said, "The words of the prophets
are written on the subway walls
And tenement halls."
And whisper'd in the sounds of silence.


- -

people love the neon light of Shao lin temple and the immovable heart" slogan tee shirt.

and sound of silence

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by taltos
And here we go again. The thread had some good points, and now it too is threatened because someone can't seem to follow a simple rule.

THERE IS NOTHING STOPPING YOU FROM STARTING A THREAD ON ONE OF THE OTHER FORUMS. PLEASE DON'T DRAG OTHER THREADS DOWN.

-Levi


What is WCK when the voice of Leong Jan, transmitted to Yip Man, then to Ciu, then to others Cannot be heard and be banned?

What is WCK when the concept of LEong Jan's training based on Damo's teaching and Damo's Voice cannot be heard and be banned?


What is one discuss about ? WCK? You must be kidding. WCK according to Who? you? are you the sifu of Leong Jan can overwrite Leong?
I feel sorry for Leong Jan even he is not my ancestor.

[taltos]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
If you study Yip Man WCK, you are not learning how to fight like Yip Man, you are learning a training approach Yip favored.

Excellent point Terence! I find myself reminding my Sidai and Simui of this frequently. Even the order in which you train the exercises is not a carbon copy of GM Yip Man. If it were, then you had better hope you yourself are a carbon copy of Yip Man, because that's the only way it could work just as well for you personally. Otherwise, one had best personalize it in application.

Excellent point.

-Levi

[taltos]

Originally posted by Hendrik
What is WCK when the voice of Leong Jan, transmitted to Yip Man, then to Ciu, then to others Cannot be heard and be banned?

First, it's not being banned. As has been stated numerous times, you are more than welcome to post a thread on one of the other, MORE APPROPRIATE forums. I don't run this place, I just follow the rules here because I enjoy participating and I agreed to the rules when I signed up. As did most of us.

Second, not all WC is fron Leung Jan. Not all WC claims a heritage that requires discussion of the concepts inappropriate to this forum.

I'm not disagreeing with you. There is no conflict here between you and me. I think it should be OK for us to post about those concepts here. But I am not the moderator, and I respect Sandman and his decision, so I will abide by his rules. He is not asking us to stop posting about it EVER, just not here. I can disagree and still respect that (and him) 100%. I'm just sharing that with others in the spirit of discussion.


Originally posted by Hendrik
What is one discuss about ? WCK? You must be kidding. WCK according to Who? you? are you the sifu of Leong Jan can overwrite Leong? I feel sorry for Leong Jan even he is not my ancestor.

I am NOT kidding. Sandman really DID ask us to not discuss certain things on this forum. That is real. It really happened. We have the posts to prove it.

When did I EVER imply that you had to discuss WC according to me? Never. The lineage I train HAS those concepts, so according to "me," we would be discussing them. THERE IS NO CONFLICT HERE BETWEEN YOU AND I. You disagree with the rules. I disagree with the rules. The difference is I choose to follow them and you SEEM (I won't speak for you) to be getting upset.

When did I EVER imply that I had ANYTHING over on Leung Jan? NEVER. It is unfortunate to me that you chose to make implications that are unfounded and erroneous in a public setting. It belittles both you and I.

Again, if you would like to discuss these concepts on another forum, WHERE THE THREAD WILL NOT BE CLOSED, I'll be there. I promise. But the rules prohibit us from doing it here. Let's just respect that. Sandman doesn't get a stipend for moderating here, so let's try to not make extra work for him by blatantly disregarding his rules.

I do find it very interesting that we are in a situation now where someone who trains an art that is contingent upon said philosophies is trying very hard to have a conversation without referencing those philosophies (something that has been viewed as virtually impossible), and it is someone else that is doing everything they can to try to forse it back onto the table. Hmmmmm.

-Levi

[PaulH]

Hendrik,

Got to say that the song is darned good! I guess that the songwriter is speaking of an overwhelming sense of alienation among people today. And we have a lot of bad disconnection too in this forum. For the records, I recall Sandman let it slided before many mentions of Chan in your previous posts. He just excercised his judicious judgment on what is proper once in a blue moon. =)

[Ernie]

yoda,
Where is WCK?

Sink under the river of Canton the night the Qing Ambush the fine jade association.

let it be.

Time to leave the land of Qing.


finally your getting it , let it go
if you can't talk about fighting and combative training and applications with out going into the land of the dead , and stealing other peoples words
then perhaps you should question your own understanding

it's not all that complicated . people chode to muck things up by putting there ego's , desires . and personal flaws/ agenda's

on it .

better to sink , so something new and better can be born

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by Ernie

finally your getting it , let it go
if you can't talk about fighting and combative training and applications with out going into the land of the dead , and stealing other peoples words
then perhaps you should question your own understanding

it's not all that complicated . people chode to muck things up by putting there ego's , desires . and personal flaws/ agenda's

on it .

better to sink , so something new and better can be born



let see how different conciousness in spiral dynamic will response :D



the survival guy: cry and hope god send a message out for everyone to explain what is going on.

the tribal guy: great, you are not in my tribe the less magic you know the better.

The power god guy : Who the XXXX you think you are? compare with Leong Jan?

The rules followers guy : This is an act of Cheating the sifu and destroy the ancestors' teaching.

The pragmatic guy : why waste my time for your benifit. you dont have the full pice of technology is great for my competition power. not worth my investment, and it is great to keep you dumb. hahaha

The human right: it is not right to be ego center and not let others hear the voice of all. every one has equal right.

The flexflow: it is obvious all this will happen since very one use oneself as the center of the universe. hahahah

The Chan guy: hahahaha it is not the flag move, nor the wind move, your mind move. what is reality it cannot be changed. eat a cup of tea. :D

hahahaha. I rather be the Chan guy. if I can. but then I rather to be..... it is fun to shift up and down.

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by taltos
First, it's not being banned. As has been stated numerous times, you are more than welcome to post a thread on one of the other, MORE APPROPRIATE forums.



without Leong Jan, there is no Yip Man. There is no Yip Man, there in no this WING CHUN forum today.

Where is the MORE APPROPRIATE forums for Leong Jan's WCK idea? Qigong Forum?


But, ofcorse, I can understand how different people want to make thier view the proper. and people always group to embrace certain view which they think benifit themself or right.

That is reality. and one has to accept reality. because different type of people exist in this world.


As for the intepretation, since we all stand in the ground of pragmatic. I would say the term " intepretation" largely was used to give face. instead of saying --- you dont know or you are wrong by evidence.

But then, we can be pragmatic with others, can we being pragmatic and accept the facts about ourself too?


world is complex.
and when mention about fighting and to improve fighting or to become the best figther the idea itself is already an act to protect the ego and "How Yong Dou Hen", meaning love to be strong and to compete to see who is more dare. that is the sadness of human.

As what Wong Fei-Hung slogan said " HOw Yong Dou Hen, bi bai bi wang". meaning love to be strong and to compete to see who is more dare, that will result in destroying and vanishing. that is the reverse of MO Duk or Wu De or martial virture.

Wing Chun Kuen is a Mo Kung or Wu Kung. Wu means stop figthing. Kung means the capabilities. the whole term means The capability to stop fighting. That is the definition of Chinese Wu Kung or MO kung.

Are we still in the same track with the ancestors or we love to HOw Yong Dou Hen ? observe our own action, and it tells alots.

[taltos]

Originally posted by Hendrik
Where is the MORE APPROPRIATE forums for Leong Jan's WCK idea? Qigong Forum?

I took a look at the other forums, and here's two I saw:

Qigong and Meditation
All aspects of Qigong (Chi Kung) and the meditation arts and philosophies of the Chinese culture

Other Related Arts
Chinese Non-martial or meditative arts (ie. calligraphy, acupuncture, feng shui, TCM, etc.) and Non-Chinese martial and meditative arts (Karate, Tae Kwon Do, Muay Thai, Jujitsu, Yoga etc.)

There might be others, I just took a quick peek.

Maybe Sandman would have some suggestions. Or maybe we could email Gene Ching and see if we could get a Chan Forum started. Who knows? Hendrick, do you want to work together with me to try and get a Chan Forum started?


Originally posted by Hendrik
But, ofcorse, I can understand how different people want to make thier view the proper. and people always group to embrace certain view which they think benifit themself or right.

Could you help me understand what you mean here? I don;t think you are saying that I am trying to stifle you because I think I'm right... I'm pretty sure that my earlier posts made it clear that there is no conflict between you and I... since we both want to discuss Chan. SO I must be missing something here. Could you be a little more specific? Thanks in advance!


Originally posted by Hendrik
As for the intepretation, since we all stand in the ground of pragmatic. I would say the term " intepretation" largely was used to give face. instead of saying --- you dont know or you are wrong by evidence.

Wow! I always thought that was accepting that not everyone thinks alike. I had never considered that it was actually an insult to accept that people interpret things differently. I'll have to think about that, but I think that I prefer my definition that hold inherent respect for the other person and their opinions. What a dismal world when we can't walk our own paths.

-Levi

[taltos]

Originally posted by Hendrik
observe our own action, and it tells alots.

It certainly does.

[Tom Kagan]

Originally posted by PaulH
... I guess that the songwriter is speaking of an overwhelming sense of alienation among people today. ...

That song was written 40 years ago. :eek:


Let's all get up and dance to a song
That was a hit before your mother was born.
Though she was born a long, long time ago
Your mother should know (Your mother should...)
Your mother should know (...know.)
Lift up your hearts and sing me a song
That was a hit before your mother was born.
Though she was born a long, long time ago
Your mother should know (Your mother should...)
Your mother should know
Your mother should know (Your mother should...)
Your mother should know


:)

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by taltos

Could you help me understand what you mean here?


If we look at the model of Spiral dynamics. We can see the tribal group with the tribal. The pragmatic group with the pragmatic.
the human right group with the human right.
and every conciousness has a "believe" or view which hold "real " for them.


That is nature.

[taltos]

Originally posted by Hendrik
If we look at the model of Spiral dynamics. We can see the tribal group with the tribal. The pragmatic group with the pragmatic.
the human right group with the human right.
and every conciousness has a "believe" or view which hold "real " for them.


That is nature.

OK. I can see that. And what was the point that you were trying to make? I understand the "spiral dymanics" thing now, but I'm not sure where you were going with it.

-Levi

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by taltos
OK. I can see that. And what was the point that you were trying to make? I understand the "spiral dymanics" thing now, but I'm not sure where you were going with it.

-Levi



Fighting as first priority, moral code as first priority, investigating different ideas as first priority.....

we all just human filtering/emphasis/or de-emphasis information with our own setted conciousness memes.

[taltos]

A-ha! And it is very helpful to be able to h8umble oneself and see what your first priority is. That way, one can always be aware of their own prejudices and the "filter" they are using.

Good point.

[PaulH]

Hi Tom,

Okay, let's all get up and see that cultish movie "The Graduate" again! Once a classic it still speaks now as it did yesterday. Something never changes as time goes by! Oh yeah! We should hear more of Chan:
"(Latouche: "You meddling devil!") Honorable ancestors refute suggested kinship. "

Regards,
PH

[Tom Kagan]

Leave "The Graduate" on the shelf and pick up "The Manchurian Candidate."

Halfway through the original film there is an excellent fight scene between Frank Sinatra (Major Marco) and Henry Silva (Chunjin).


Everything is under control. (http://www.ManchurianCandidate.com)

[t_niehoff]

Hi Jim,

There ya go! Second rate results may be what you feel the info. produces but I feel different. It just takes some hard work just like anything. Its all about the individual and how hard they work at what they are taught. JR

**It's not what you or I "feel" the info produces or "think" or "believe" what it produces, but whether it actually does produce results for you. Not results in demonstrations or drills or in friendly "touching hands" but in genuine fighting. If it's producing fighting results for you, then it will be easy to show us the results. When people see great results, you won't need to convince them through argument of the validity of what you do. Why would anyone want to do "watered down", DNA-deficient WCK if you can prove what you do is more effective?

**If you can't produce results, then it isn't working. Boxing, for the sake of illustration, has a certain way of throwing a cross, a way that maximizes power while at the same time minimizing exposure. They don't throw it that way because the DNA says so or because John L. Sullivan says so or because it's "dogma" but because that's the best way to make a cross work (function effectively) -- and that can be proven, and is proven, when you actually fight. Boxers don't just do it that way because they are told to but because they see from fighting the wisdom in it. And if someone finds a better way for them, modifiying it somehow, and can make it work, it won't be discarded as "heresy." But if someone tries to use that tool in a less effective way, they will pay the price for their "mistake", especially against someone with real skills. So if my body-structure is poor WCK, if my "engine" is compromizing me, just like if my cross is bad boxing, it will not work well in fighting skilled people and will be easily taken advantage of. Instead of arguing how this or that isn't "traditional" or lacks the DNA or is not how the "old guys" did it, just show everyone that what they do doesn't work well, that it isn't as effective as what you do. >>Effectiveness is why these things were developed in the first place; effectiveness is the quality-control of WCK.<<

Terence come on. The only way to know is to use it against others. This is nothing new. JR.

**"Use" means fight, not "touching hands", not drills (chi sao). Fighting against skilled, (nonWCK) fighters. Otherwise, you're not "using" WCK.

Thats cool Terence but did you ever spend the time to cultivate the compact body and see what results that produces? I am not saying it will work better for you! It may not but what Iam saying is by making the body wider and better suited for you then you end up losing out on certain things. Its still a form of WCK. JR

**Anything we do will have consequences. If something is less effective, it is easy to show.

Wong had a great quote about using WCK and not letting it use you.

And he is right. It all has to burn into your natural ways so we are not some robotic patternized drones. JR

**No, there is more to what he was talking about -- including not letting WCK trap you into being its slave.

I don't use something because some ancestor *perhaps* (and we have no way of knowing for sure) could make it work for him or because my teacher says this is how it should be done but because I can make it work for *me* (and tell me, what good is the "traditional" if it doesn't work for me?).

I agree and disagree. While we were not there to watch those guys fight we can most certain see that those guys would not have taught us something that was so opposite of what may come out in reality. It may not be pretty. I may not be as compact. It may be a lot of things but to issue and recieve the force with Short Inch Force and other things one will need to not be so far away from its core engine that we spend so many years training.

**There are ways to power our tools that are effective and there are ways to power our tools that are not effective (in fighting). This is learned from experience, from the doing not from "dogma". Going back to my boxing cross analogy, if you keep getting hit when you throw a cross or having little power when you throw a cross, then you know you are doing something wrong. And you'll be able to figure out for yourself -- it's easier with a good coach -- those things you need to do to make it more effective. Then you go test it and see if you were right or not. That's how you improve.

Do you train your body so differenlty from how you try to use it? Whats the difference then? You like to train SNT with Robert's body structure.

**I don't use "Robert's body structure" -- I use my own body structure. Robert has developed his approach to teaching his students how to develop their own body structure by focusing on function (letting application be your sifu).

I like to train mine with compact structure. We both use it reasonably similar to how we train.

**It has nothing to do with "like" or preferences -- it has to do with effectiveness. I would "like" to be able to blast folks with my chi-****s or empty-force, but it won't happen. I don't use a mechanic or structure because I "like" it, but because I have found through experience that it works for me.

Oh Terence! You just dont get what I am saying. All I am saying is that there are certain key qualities that the so-called "old ways" cultivate and that is just a fact!

**Just as there were certain key qualities that old-style western boxing cultivated, but boxing has evolved because it is not constrained by its practitioners trying to adhere to "old ways" solely for the sake of tradition (and being able to call it boxing). Effectiveness is the guiding principle, not tradition or dogma.


The further we change and change and change goes further aways from those key attributes. Just that simple. I have tested my art against BJJ guys, Filipino guys, Thai etc.. Boston has a good community for that sort of thing.

**By testing, I mean fighting. Not kid-glove stuff, let's-see-what-we-would-do-playing-around-stuff -- where your opponent is trying to take your head off, to really resisit you, to defeat you.

I am not out there to be some master or anything. I dont even consider myself good! Yup! Thats right! I have seen good and know I am not there! I do care about developing myself and sharing the art. So, while you are still talking about just fighting with whatever I believe one should spend a bit of time and cultivate the engine. Maybe it wont work for them! Thats ok. Maybe it will. In the end it will be the individual that makes the difference. But! Just because something produces some results it does not mean its WCK and just because something looks or talks like its old and cant be used then what good is that? We all know we must be able to use our stuff otherwise whats the point of doing it. You dont see me saying; Hey! TN, you said your wider is better! Go fight some MMA guys.

**But that's exactly what I do (and my students do, and I do in front of my students). That's how I know what works for me or not. That's how I know what I need to do to develop and get better. That's how I develop timing and sensitivity. That's how I learn to fight. That's what anyone must do who wants to learn to be a good fighter.


I should hope those who train any art takes the time to test it out. That should be a given! Do you really think we would be doing this stuff if it didn't work for us?

**For me, testing it out, fighting, is part of the training. And to answer your question: yes. I've found that fighters have a different focus or perspective that the theoreticians. The experience one gains by fighting skilled people puts a certain perspective on things. For example, WCK fighters won't be saying "WCK is a complete art" or "WCK is perfect" or "WCK is a superior art" or anything like that because they know better. Similarly, they won't be talking about DNA or "old guy methods" or the like -- that's a dead giveaway for a theoretician. Folks interested in actually fighting with WCK won't think that way (haven't you noticed that KWJ, AndrewS, Merryprankster, etc. don't chime in on DNA discussions?).

Regards,

Terence

[Ernie]

hendrik , sorry you bored me to death at this point
[conciousness in spiral dynamic ]

i think i threw up a little at this self serving point

[The Chan guy: hahahaha it is not the flag move, nor the wind move, your mind move. what is reality it cannot be changed. eat a cup of tea]


this tribal guy votes you off the island and turns off your ''flame''

go back to the crypt yoda , and rumage around with old bones looking for the future ;)

[Jim Roselando]

Terence,


We have had this conversation before. You are just repeating yourself. You assume that because some people like to look into the arts origins or check the DNA they dont like to fight. We all know what I am talking about.

This has nothing to do with being superior, secret, one and only, etc. etc. etc.. None of that means didly. There are many that do the same sort of stuff. It is WCK after all. Yet! There are certain qualities that are produced by WCK. Those are undeniable facts. I dont believe that they are not valuable in todays times! Changning to fit your body is fine. We all adjust and fit and apply according to our body but when things go too far away from the core engine then certain attributes or qualities vanish. There are good and bad in all methods. Nobody is claiming because someone has changed the structure to fit their body that it is POOR or waterred down or not effective etc.. There is good players and bad players in all arts/methods/ways. Its the individual that makes the difference.

My art is modified. Yup! Modified and I dont claim it to be the original etc.. I know that the engine is similar to the old ways if thats a good way to put it but LJ did his thing to the art. So, just as you follow Robert's YM platform I follow the Fung's LJ patform. We all do WCK with the same tools. Some just have a different flavor. Now, you can talk about Fighting Fighting Fighting all you want but some of us (believe it or not) actually have fought others that want to hurt us as bad as we want to hurt them.

So, if its just fighting we want to talk about then start a thread regarding fighting! This is a forum for discussion and just because some just want to discuss fighting then it does not mean that the other topics are not as interesting for the others. What good does it do for you to jump in the different thread that people enjoy on their spare time and say; It doesn't matter! Go Fight With It!

Why not make it a two part thread! One would be Fighting against other skilled martial artists and the other would be real street fighting. This is fine with me but please respect that on a discussion forum there will be lots of stuff people want to discuss even if it is not something you find interesting.


Good speaking with you.


Regards,

[Rhat]

Originally posted by Jim Roselando


Why not make it a two part thread! One would be Fighting against other skilled martial artists and the other would be real street fighting.


Like a bridge over troubled water:confused:

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by Ernie
hendrik , sorry you bored me to death at this point
[conciousness in spiral dynamic ]

i think i threw up a little at this self serving point

[The Chan guy: hahahaha it is not the flag move, nor the wind move, your mind move. what is reality it cannot be changed. eat a cup of tea]


this tribal guy votes you off the island and turns off your ''flame''

go back to the crypt yoda , and rumage around with old bones looking for the future ;)



so you are in the tribal that believe in voodoo and avoid facture evidents?

No wonder :D


BTW, you get bored is your problem not mine. you like to discuss other stuffs go to other topic. that simple, got it?

I have never expect Tribal to discuss about nyquist theorem anyway. Just too mathematical complex. and sure it doesnt exist in their world. no cell phone man. hahaha :D

[Ernie]

BTW, you get bored is your problem not mine. you like to discuss other stuffs go to other topic. that simple, got it?


see you can be direct with out any mumbo jumbo good job i'm proud of you , your coming into the future ha ha

sure i will stay off your boring thread , feel free to spiral , circle , pillow , reserect the dead , pssss hey i see dead people
ha ha
man i missed your crazy a$$ :D

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by Ernie
BTW, you get bored is your problem not mine. you like to discuss other stuffs go to other topic. that simple, got it?


see you can be direct with out any mumbo jumbo good job i'm proud of you , your coming into the future ha ha

sure i will stay off your boring thread , feel free to spiral , circle , pillow , reserect the dead , pssss hey i see dead people
ha ha
man i missed your crazy a$$ :D


hahahaha, I study bagua , iching, and fensui too. those are mumbo jumbo right? :D

[Ernie]

hahahaha, I study bagua and fensui too. those are mumbo jumbo right?

yep

let me see last time i say a bagua guy fensui any one to death
um .......................... never

hell my teacher has written books on fensui , chinese palm reading , five elements

but you don't see me running around caught up with silly stuff

if you want me off your thread dont ask me questions


you should study needle point that way you will at least have a nice sweater instead of a bunch of empty words :D

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by Ernie
hahahaha, I study bagua and fensui too. those are mumbo jumbo right?

yep

let me see last time i say a bagua guy fensui any one to death
um .......................... never

hell my teacher has written books on fensui , chinese palm reading , five elements

but you don't see me running around caught up with silly stuff

if you want me off your thread dont ask me questions


you should study needle point that way you will at least have a nice sweater instead of a bunch of empty words :D



Once upon a time, Nyquist Criteria , eigen value....etc are bunch of empty words for me. those complex math... yuk. empty empty....

So, I keep complaning to my Communication theory class proffessor.

Guess what?

It turns out I am the one knows not about the subject and having a big ego wanting the world to go MY way!
and I am not the role model for the communication theory class either.

What an experience to find out who am I. :D

But I guess that is the growing pain everyone has to go through. hahaha. when the day is young.

[anerlich]

and avoid facture evidents?

I'm not sure what "facture evidents" (singular or plural?) is/are, but it does SOUND like something to steer well clear of.


and I am not the role model for the communication theory class either.

Even a casual reading of any of your posts would make that obvious to anyone.

[anerlich]

Halfway through the original film there is an excellent fight scene between Frank Sinatra (Major Marco) and Henry Silva (Chunjin).

Blahhh. I prefer the fight scene in "The Fiendish Plot of Dr Fu Manchu" between (one of) Peter Sellers' character(s) and his Asian valet.

And as for old songs, I'd prefer "On Your Knees" by WASP to any of the aforementioned :D Much more appropriate to fighting.

[Ernie]

It turns out I am the one knows not about the subject and having a big ego wanting the world to go MY way!
and I am not the role model for the communication theory class either.

What an experience to find out who am I



-------- cool good luck with that ,
hey did you know they have special padded rooms for guys like you
were you can play little emperor all you want

heres one for you it starts there was an old man from nantucket


as for songs in theme with anerlich


'' head '' by prince

[AmanuJRY]

Originally posted by anerlich
Blahhh. I prefer the fight scene in "The Fiendish Plot of Dr Fu Manchu" between (one of) Peter Sellers' character(s) and his Asian valet.

And as for old songs, I'd prefer "On Your Knees" by WASP to any of the aforementioned :D Much more appropriate to fighting.

Are you sure your not referring to one of the 'Pink Panther' movies???

...and how about the song 'Do you want to fight me?' by Aussie band Frenzle Rhomb?

[t_niehoff]

Hi Jim,

We have had this conversation before. You are just repeating yourself. You assume that because some people like to look into the arts origins or check the DNA they dont like to fight. We all know what I am talking about.

**Looking into "origins" is fine, but there is no such thing as "WCK DNA" -- this is the old "11 secret herbs and spices" stuff simply repackaged. The DNA nonsense is what the theoreticians use (and each claim they have the real, original DNA) to validate what they do instead of results. BJJers, for instance, don't argue about whether an armbar has the "correct DNA". What if "original" WCK, Foshan body-structure, or whatever else is simply crappy? And it only works against poorly skilled fighters? I don't assume "older is better". My view is we don't just copy things because others did it a certain way but we find out for ourselves how to make the tools work for us. This is what fighters do in every fighting method. This is what our WCK ancestors did *if* they were fighters.

This has nothing to do with being superior, secret, one and only, etc. etc. etc.. None of that means didly. There are many that do the same sort of stuff. It is WCK after all. Yet! There are certain qualities that are produced by WCK. Those are undeniable facts. I dont believe that they are not valuable in todays times! Changning to fit your body is fine. We all adjust and fit and apply according to our body but when things go too far away from the core engine then certain attributes or qualities vanish. There are good and bad in all methods. Nobody is claiming because someone has changed the structure to fit their body that it is POOR or waterred down or not effective etc.. There is good players and bad players in all arts/methods/ways. Its the individual that makes the difference.

**Every fighting method has tools, and also the body mechanics that effectively support those tools. The tools and body-mechancis need to fit like a glove and hand, otherwise the tools won't work effectively (try changing boxing's body mechanics and still use the jab, cross, hook, etc. and see where it takes you). We don't need to look to how "old guys" did it, you can discover the mechanics by exploring for yourself how to make the tools effective (if the body structure/mechanics don't support the tools -- fit like a hand and glove -- they won't work well). So instead of relying on someone telling me "do it like this because that is how WCK is meant to be done", I can find out for myself. The former is theoretical information, the latter is knowledge gained from experience.

My art is modified. Yup! Modified and I dont claim it to be the original etc.. I know that the engine is similar to the old ways if thats a good way to put it but LJ did his thing to the art. So, just as you follow Robert's YM platform I follow the Fung's LJ patform.

**I don't follow anyone's "platform" -- you don't get it. I don't do things -- forms, drills, anything -- because Robert tells me to, I do them a certain way because my experience tells me to. And it continually evolves as I gain more experience. WCK is an individual method, like all fighting methods by necessity need to be. There should be no "platform" IMO; each person should be taught individually.

We all do WCK with the same tools. Some just have a different flavor.

**Exactly. But the "flavor" needs to be individual, determined by experience, not just parroted for tradition's sake.

Now, you can talk about Fighting Fighting Fighting all you want but some of us (believe it or not) actually have fought others that want to hurt us as bad as we want to hurt them.

**Yes, everyone is a skilled fighter behind closed doors.

So, if its just fighting we want to talk about then start a thread regarding fighting! This is a forum for discussion and just because some just want to discuss fighting then it does not mean that the other topics are not as interesting for the others. What good does it do for you to jump in the different thread that people enjoy on their spare time and say; It doesn't matter! Go Fight With It!

Why not make it a two part thread! One would be Fighting against other skilled martial artists and the other would be real street fighting. This is fine with me but please respect that on a discussion forum there will be lots of stuff people want to discuss even if it is not something you find interesting.

**Folks can talk about whatever they like. People can have all kinds of opinions. The great thing about martial arts is that we can determine fairly easily whether someone knows what they are talking about. The trouble is since most WCK "practitioners" aren't practicing martial arts, what we get is non-martial artists arguing about how they think things should be done, and they rely on lineage, DNA, authority, etc. to support their opinions. In an earlier post you brought up how the moving away from the "original DNA" somehow eroded WCK. IMHO, what really erodes WCK is that sort of attitude, the folks that rely on lineage, DNA, authority -- in other words, the folks that take WCK and emasculate it into a nonmartial art.

Regards,

Terence

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by Ernie
It turns out I am the one knows not about the subject and having a big ego wanting the world to go MY way!
and I am not the role model for the communication theory class either.

What an experience to find out who am I



-------- cool good luck with that ,
hey did you know they have special padded rooms for guys like you
were you can play little emperor all you want

heres one for you it starts there was an old man from nantucket


as for songs in theme with anerlich


'' head '' by prince




A year has 4 seasons. Spring, summer, fall, Winter.

Believe only one's favorite season to be the only season of the year doesnt tell the full story of A year.
And show a very limited view about living.

[Ernie]

A year has 4 seasons. Spring, summer, fall, Winter.

Believe only one's favorite season to be the only season of the year doesnt tell the full story of A year.
And show a very limited view about living.




living in the past is like a man with his head on backwards

living in the imaginary past is like a man with his head in has a$$

compliments of uncle ''chans'' fortune cookie pipe dream company

have a great day

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by Ernie
A year has 4 seasons. Spring, summer, fall, Winter.

Believe only one's favorite season to be the only season of the year doesnt tell the full story of A year.
And show a very limited view about living.




living in the past is like a man with his head on backwards

living in the imaginary past is like a man with his head in has a$$

compliments of uncle ''chans'' fortune cookie pipe dream company

have a great day





Confucius and the sage of Chinese said:

repeat the old , one can know the new, then one can be a sifu.

Using the past as the mirror will be able to spot once's own inadequacy.

Drinking the water, and one always remeber and respect how and where the water source from.


An art has to do with inwardness, elegant, liveliness, depth. NOT A KILL KILL BANG BANG tool to serve one's ego. for Gentlement is not a tool.

Iching, Bagua, Chan, fesui are all indepth study of live and how to live.

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

Certainly that is Chinese Culture. Some knows some dont'. Some agree some dont. But that is the Chinese cutlture DNA for past thousand of years and continous on.

[Jim Roselando]

Hey Terence,


**Looking into "origins" is fine, but there is no such thing as "WCK DNA" -- this is the old "11 secret herbs and spices" stuff simply repackaged. The DNA nonsense is what the theoreticians use (and each claim they have the real, original DNA) to validate what they do instead of results.

We can agree to disagree. Its not about validating but certain things are undeniable. We can all easily tell who does what just by looking at them and how they produce/recieve the power/structure.

BJJers, for instance, don't argue about whether an armbar has the "correct DNA". What if "original" WCK, Foshan body-structure, or whatever else is simply crappy? And it only works against poorly skilled fighters? I don't assume "older is better". My view is we don't just copy things because others did it a certain way but we find out for ourselves how to make the tools work for us. This is what fighters do in every fighting method. This is what our WCK ancestors did *if* they were fighters.

We can agree to disagree. BJJ has a certain flavor. Sambo has a certain flavor. Grecco has a certain flavor. Shoot fighting has a certain flavor. If someone claims to be doing BJJ then its real easy to tell just by watching them. Its not about the arm bar but the how the body moves and its not about copying anything. Its the core engine we all learn from the first day of training and in WCK it starts with SLT. You feel the WCK art if not done in the so-called old ways only worked against poor fighters. I guess guys like Yuen Kay San, Sum Nung, Leung Jan, Fung Chun, Yip Man, Leung Sheung etc. never fought anyone worth any salt. How good were the guys they (the modern) fought on the Roof Top's. Its only been since the 50's that this feeling has developed. Has humans changed that much since the 50's.

**Every fighting method has tools, and also the body mechanics that effectively support those tools. The tools and body-mechancis need to fit like a glove and hand, otherwise the tools won't work effectively (try changing boxing's body mechanics and still use the jab, cross, hook, etc. and see where it takes you).

We agree

We don't need to look to how "old guys" did it, you can discover the mechanics by exploring for yourself how to make the tools effective (if the body structure/mechanics don't support the tools -- fit like a hand and glove -- they won't work well). So instead of relying on someone telling me "do it like this because that is how WCK is meant to be done", I can find out for myself. The former is theoretical information, the latter is knowledge gained from experience.

We are first taught SLT and its engine. Later we cultivate from there. Its not about it being old or new its about the core engine being what it is and we develop from there.


**I don't follow anyone's "platform" -- you don't get it. I don't do things -- forms, drills, anything -- because Robert tells me to, I do them a certain way because my experience tells me to. And it continually evolves as I gain more experience. WCK is an individual method, like all fighting methods by necessity need to be. There should be no "platform" IMO; each person should be taught individually.

I do get it. When you started to learn WCK you started with SLT and engine. You dont start formless! From there you developed and then evolved to use the stuff as it best fits your body. You did start with a platform. We all do. While it may be a principle based art we can indeed say it all starts somewhere and SLT etc. is the base for one to grow from.


**Exactly. But the "flavor" needs to be individual, determined by experience, not just parroted for tradition's sake.

This is a sensative subject for you. I know that as even when, in the past, Rene mentioned that Fung Chun was scary similar to Sum Nung you were not happy about him saying that. There is a base we all develop from. Certain key attributes or traits develop from there. Its not about parroting.


**Yes, everyone is a skilled fighter behind closed doors.

Terence. We are adults. No need for snide comments. Should we all list who we have fought and have them write a testimomy when discussing fighting. We can but its rather childish.

**Folks can talk about whatever they like. People can have all kinds of opinions. The great thing about martial arts is that we can determine fairly easily whether someone knows what they are talking about. The trouble is since most WCK "practitioners" aren't practicing martial arts, what we get is non-martial artists arguing about how they think things should be done, and they rely on lineage, DNA, authority, etc. to support their opinions. In an earlier post you brought up how the moving away from the "original DNA" somehow eroded WCK. IMHO, what really erodes WCK is that sort of attitude, the folks that rely on lineage, DNA, authority -- in other words, the folks that take WCK and emasculate it into a nonmartial art.

Certain stuff is becoming not so common. That Short Shock Inch (almost vibration) ging via the three bridges is one of them. Its not about "that sort of attitude" but its just a fact IMO.

I appreciate the chat and as adults we can agree to disagree.


Regards,

[t_niehoff]

Jim,

I don't know what "agree to disagree" means. As far as I can tell, we just disagree.

There is no denying that there was a common "posture" (which we also know wasn't universal) among WCK practitioners (post Red Boat), the Foshan body-structure, but just because something has some historical significance doesn't mean it is definitive or "DNA" (which suggests an essential characteristic). People practice fighting methods not to preserve cultural relics or to copy idiosycratic movements, but to become better fighters. They are always looking to improve. Boxers didn't try to preserve John L. Sullivan-type boxing structure and modern boxers don't lament how today's fighters have strayed from the original DNA of boxing or go on the internet and complain that modern boxers shouldn't "be able to do anything and call it boxing." ;) Same for BJJ or any fighting method. To put it frankly, **you can't "preserve" a fighting method.** You only preserve cultural relics. It either continues to grow and evolve or it stagnates and dies.

Who knows, and who cares, what level of skill these "old guys" fought. For the most part, I think it's greatly exaggerated. The real question isn't whether John L. Sullivan fought some good people (maybe they were good, maybe just good for his day, maybe not good at all) or not but whether his "DNA", boxing structure or "engine" (another moronic word), defines boxing. It doesn't. What matters is how well I can box. The argument of "well John L. Sullivan was a legend, I'll believe him and how he did it" is fallacious reasoning. They way he and some others did it has historical significance but doesn't define the nature of boxing, and we determine for ourselves what is effective for us by getting into the ring. If you think "old guy" boxing is good, fine -- try it out in the ring. If you prove in the ring that the "old guy" still works, folks will flock to you. If you can't do it, then whether it is "old guy" or not doesn't matter. But don't take the high horse postition that your imaginary "DNA" defines boxing. That very position is anathema to what boxing is all about.

Regards,

Terence

[Ernie]

david carridine in a yoda suit aka hendrik
[Using the past as the mirror will be able to spot once's own inadequacy]

or just keep repeating the inadequacy of others ,

yesterday is gone today is here the next day may never come
deal with it


as for water screw that to many old germs
burn it purify it and bottle it
now that's progress ha ha

hendrik talk is cheap and old talk is even cheaper , as in it has lost it's value

there is more then enough highliy skilled people around now we can spend our time and energy on vs waisting time on stories of dead ones , were there are no real facts to back up any of the claims just more stories

you can believe inall the fairy tales you want , alice in wonder land peter pan what ever keeps your chakra's in order

be the king of your own little imaginary world

i would rather get the most out of today ................. it's so sad when the fighters become scholars and the scholars talk like fighters

better to just kill kill kill them all:D

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by Ernie
david carridine in a yoda suit aka hendrik
[Using the past as the mirror will be able to spot once's own inadequacy]

or just keep repeating the inadequacy of others ,

yesterday is gone today is here the next day may never come
deal with it


as for water screw that to many old germs
burn it purify it and bottle it
now that's progress ha ha

hendrik talk is cheap and old talk is even cheaper , as in it has lost it's value

there is more then enough highliy skilled people around now we can spend our time and energy on vs waisting time on stories of dead ones , were there are no real facts to back up any of the claims just more stories

you can believe inall the fairy tales you want , alice in wonder land peter pan what ever keeps your chakra's in order

be the king of your own little imaginary world

i would rather get the most out of today ................. it's so sad when the fighters become scholars and the scholars talk like fighters

better to just kill kill kill them all:D



Truth has no expied date code.
It never dies for it never even born.
Living in this instant does not tangle with past, present, and future.
the Thinker is not the self.

Until one arrived, one's mind and body trap by one's thoughts stream and pattern. Transcending will not happen. Wait to see the Aging body betray one.

Thus, Leong Jan said in the conclusion of his WCK summarization:

Althought we talk about fix physical methods,
Changes is depend on human's realization.
Following the ultimate teaching of Chan,
Our art's principle is to cultivate oneself,
Enligtenement in the physical platform.
However, how many can attain that state in one's life spand?
Beyond subjective and objective
unlimited of stages, unlimited of changes......



what is the color of liberation? how to implement the flowing wave? how to implement that WCK flowing water?
One, who dont know laught, One, who knows laught.

who recognized that sound between music notes instead of indulge in grasping the loud sound other made? sound will die off, But silence never die. hahahahaha



41. Following --- DAO De Ching.

When the great man learns the Way, he follows it with diligence;
When the common man learns the Way, he follows it on occasion;
When the mean man learns the Way, he laughs out loud;


Therefore it is said:
Who understands the Way seems foolish;
Who progresses on the Way seems to fail;
Who follows the Way seems to wander.

For the finest harmony appears plain;
The brightest truth appears coloured;
The richest character appears incomplete;
The bravest heart appears meek;
The simplest nature appears inconstant.......




Is that just a fooling Chinese Culture or is it the Dao include and beyond the physical realm?

hahahaha. Who knows ask Leong JAn.

[Ernie]

Aging will destroy one





yep bro , i think you pegged yourself with this one;)


i like this


When the mean man learns the Way, he laughs out loud


and this one
Who follows the Way seems to wander

-- so the difference between some one that knows the way and a lost idiot

is the idiot has an excuse for being lost ---- he is an idiot

--- the other just act's like a idiot

cool deep stuff -- yoda you amaze me we sure need those old words to guide so much wisdom ---------- not


in the words of usher --- let it burn let it burn
temples , dynasty's , ramblings of people bored out of there minds with no tv
ha ha ha

so when do you start talking about wing chun , because this is the stuff you think is so important i can see why it is fading into the past or sinking into the river
hell we should put some cenent shoes on it to save us all time

:D

[Hendrik]

Leong Jan said in the conclusion of his WCK summarization:

Althought we talk about fix physical methods,
Changes is depend on human's realization.
Following the ultimate teaching of Chan,
Our art's principle is to cultivate oneself,
Enligtenement in the physical platform.
However, how many can attain that state in one's life spand?
Beyond subjective and objective
unlimited of stages, unlimited of changes......



some knows how to listen, some dont and always complain based on thier thoughts based on the way they want world to be. hahahaha.

Isnt it the basic of WCK teach one how to listen ?

But then, some study WCK, Some just think whatever they do is WCK.

What a wonderfull life it would be, so many variaty... :D

[Redd]

Originally posted by t_niehoff
Jim,

I don't know what "agree to disagree" means. As far as I can tell, we just disagree.

Classy. :rolleyes:

[AmanuJRY]

You guys crack me up..

Henrik,

Most Americans, even ones who follow buddhism, don't really LIKE speaking in koans, they may even understand the concept, but then once you understand the concept of koans the need to use them is pointless (just as pointless as the koans are to begin with).

Try a rational conversation, see if you can impress us with your knowledge of WC and not your knowledge of chan.


Ernie,

Your just fueling it man.:D

for both of you a quote;

".....[psychotherepy] is concerned with neither what has happened [memory] nor with what is going to happen [desire] but whith what 'is' happening."- W.R. Bion 1967

This is true for us as well.:D:) ;)

[Ernie]

Ernie,

Your just fueling it man


ha ha you picked up on it :D i like being the anti hendrik it's so much fun :D :D :D


if he is a vamp
then let me be the sun

[Rhat]

Originally posted by AmanuJRY

Henrik,

Most Americans, even ones who follow buddhism, don't really LIKE speaking in koans, they may even understand the concept, but then once you understand the concept of koans the need to use them is pointless (just as pointless as the koans are to begin with).

Try a rational conversation, see if you can impress us with your knowledge of WC and not your knowledge of chan.



Life would be easier if Hendrik could speak ENGLISH. But that's his comfort level talking. heheheehe,:D :D :D

[PaulH]

Justin,

You'll find Hendrik seemingly and deliberately speaking in riddles most of the time. It's his modus operandi to break down the constant interferences of the logical mind and thus to give the intuitive wisdom a chance to take over. Some may get enlightened by this; other become fleas ticking off.

PS. It's the Chan thing! "Eyes of kitten open only after nine days." =)

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by PaulH
Justin,

You'll find Hendrik seemingly and deliberately speaking in riddles most of the time. It's his modus operandi to break down the constant interferences of the logical mind and thus to give the intuitive wisdom a chance to take over. Some may get enlightened by this; other become fleas ticking off.

PS. It's the Chan thing! "Eyes of kitten open only after nine days." =)


Pual,


Some how, Leong Jan and other WCk ancestors recorded about Chan and Qi ect in thier summary of thier art.

Certainly one can choose to ignore anything the Leong Jan and other WCK ancestors' wrote.

However, my stand is simple, Why was these highly skill fighters include such a thing similar to Chan in thier summarization of thier art?

are they turn scholars or there are something they tries to express and telling the decendent?


Sure, people can think they are nuts, ect. The facts are we dont know what they are talking about. so, shouldnt we study and figure out what is going on before one nagate everything one doesnt even have clue about ?

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by AmanuJRY




Most Americans, even ones who follow buddhism, don't really LIKE speaking in koans, they may even understand the concept, but then once you understand the concept of koans the need to use them is pointless (just as pointless as the koans are to begin with).

Try a rational conversation, see if you can impress us with your knowledge of WC and not your knowledge of chan.




1, IS this a Koan? Nah, it is far far away.

2, what is a rational conversation when Chinese tradition culture has to be rationalized according to Western logic?

3, Leong Jan said, Chan is the ultimate of WCK in his WCK summarization. and what is chan? one doesnt care to find out fine. one wants to find out fine. Why what Leong Jan said needs other's approval?


4, Impress is about a problem in 3rd Chakra. Not a Chan issues. hahaha. who cares. what if WCK is Chan at the ultimate as Leong Jan wrote? hahahaha.

[PaulH]

I never did have any quarrels with Chan. When he speaks, I listen. =)

[Hendrik]

Originally posted by PaulH
I never did have any quarrels with Chan. When he speaks, I listen. =)


OK. I sing my sound of silence now on. hahahaha.

[PaulH]

This task was appointed to you, Master Hendrik! =)

[Rhat]

Originally posted by Hendrik
OK. I sing my sound of silence now on. hahahaha.

Now that it's business as usual, hehehe, hahaha you could grow old singing someone else's songs.

Offer advice, nothing more. Try a rational conversation, see if you can impress us with your knowledge of WC and not your knowledge of hehehe, hahaha.:eek: :eek: :eek: ;)

[anerlich]

You'll find Hendrik seemingly and deliberately speaking in riddles most of the time. It's his modus operandi to break down the constant interferences of the logical mind and thus to give the intuitive wisdom a chance to take over. Some may get enlightened by this; other become fleas ticking off.

Paul: not just hook, line and sinker, but the whole rod and half the fisherman's arm as well.

Incomprehensibility does not imply profundity, just incomprehensibility.

Been enlightened yet? Not on this path.

[PaulH]

You know, Anerlich, I rather bite at anything interesting these days. Life can be so boring as a mud turtle in a little pond! =)

[AmanuJRY]

PaulH--You'll find Hendrik seemingly and deliberately speaking in riddles most of the time. It's his modus operandi to break down the constant interferences of the logical mind and thus to give the intuitive wisdom a chance to take over. Some may get enlightened by this; other become fleas ticking off.

I noticed, and that is what I was referring to by saying he speaks in koans.




Hendrik--what is a rational conversation when Chinese tradition culture has to be rationalized according to Western logic?

One that everyone can participate. What I mean by a rational conversation is one that people will participate in because of shared interest and ability to comprehend. Don't take me wrong, it's not a lack of interest in chan or what Leung Jan had to say, it is the way you express it. And, no offence, your use of english adds to the difficulty in following your thoughts. Western logic? No, go ahead with whatever logic you wish to use, after all IMO, logic is logic, it doesn't know race, creed, color or nationality, I would just suggest you try COMMUNICATING your logic without sounding like the sterotypical monk speaking in koans (BTW, I don't think everything you say is a koan, just most of it:D ).

[Ernie]

he speaks in koans

----- d amn i thought you were talking about how he sounds like a cone head , from sat, night live :D


----- now i don't care what part of the great wall your from east or west that $hit right there was just funny


lord please forgive me for making fun of the chan mentally challenged ;)

[anerlich]

he speaks in koans

That is a gross abuse of the definition of "koan".


What I mean by a rational conversation is one that people will participate in because of shared interest and ability to comprehend.

The problem here is not inability to comprehend, but a penchant for obfuscation, and the delusion that using nebulous phrases, inappropriate metaphors and referencing Ch'an and the like in posts will convince people you have arcane knowledge or are smarter than they are.

[AmanuJRY]

It's OK because I'm not 'enlightened'.:)