Is WC Shaolin ? [Archive] - Kung Fu Magazine Forums

chusauli

09-23-2007, 10:20 AM

Although some families of WCK believe their system has its roots in Shaolin, there is no real proof of WCK beyond the Opera Boat people, so it is in general, speculation.

The early origins of WCK are often convoluted by both martial artists and secret society who tell a variation tale of the "Xi Lu" myths. The allegedly venerable 5 who escaped the "burning of the Shaolin" ordered by Kang Xi, led by renegade monk, Ma Ning Yee, and swear vengeance are good tales for common folk who have no studies in Chinese history.

There are many holes in the story:
1) Monks don't swear vengeance
2) Who are the Xi Lu?
3) Why would Emperor Kang Xi burn a temple when his father became a monk?
4) Which royal decree made it so that the Southern temple would be burned? There would be records of it in the Imperial court that exist until today...
5) How come the names of these 5 ancestors vary with whom is telling the story?
6) Would a renegade monk Ma Ning Yee really lead the royal army to destroy a Shaolin?

The more details that are added to such stories lead to more questions. I dismiss these stories as folklore and legends.

As for real history, we at least know that WCK is not Shaolin. It never came from Shaolin, Northern or Southern, but certainly has elements of different martial systems. We can only really trace WCK to the Opera Boat people who were disbanded due to an uprising of Lee Man Mao and the Hong Gan society.

There's a lot more, but stories abound and each system wants to preserve their lore as truth. I think we can listen to these stories and check with historical facts and see for ourselves.

Of course, you have to look at why people are insistent that their lore is considered "history".

Savi

09-23-2007, 11:21 AM

Although some families of WCK believe their system has its roots in Shaolin, there is no real proof of WCK beyond the Opera Boat people, so it is in general, speculation. Really, so how do you explain how Wing Chun ended up with the Butterfly swords and the Wooden Dummy? Those are in fact Shaolin-based tools. How did those things end up in Wing Chun, based on your research?

The early origins of WCK are often convoluted by both martial artists and secret society who tell a variation tale of the "Xi Lu" myths. The allegedly venerable 5 who escaped the "burning of the Shaolin" ordered by Kang Xi, led by renegade monk, Ma Ning Yee, and swear vengeance are good tales for common folk who have no studies in Chinese history.You are entitled to your opinion, but don't mistake your opinion for fact. There are always two sides to a coin. How much do you really know about the secret societies??? Perhaps your view is also convoluted as you propose others to be.

There are many holes in the story:
1) Monks don't swear vengeance
2) Who are the Xi Lu?
3) Why would Emperor Kang Xi burn a temple when his father became a monk?
4) Which royal decree made it so that the Southern temple would be burned? There would be records of it in the Imperial court that exist until today...
5) How come the names of these 5 ancestors vary with whom is telling the story?
6) Would a renegade monk Ma Ning Yee really lead the royal army to destroy a Shaolin?

The more details that are added to such stories lead to more questions. I dismiss these stories as folklore and legends.Indeed stories and legends are created as a smokescreen for civilians. It would take a real insider with actual connections to find the way through it. What do you know about monks? What do you know about their lifestyle? How educated are you in this field? Based on what you have been presenting on the internet so far, your "research" is very biased.

As for real history, we at least know that WCK is not Shaolin. It never came from Shaolin, Northern or Southern, but certainly has elements of different martial systems. We can only really trace WCK to the Opera Boat people who were disbanded due to an uprising of Lee Man Mao and the Hong Gan society.You NEED to specify which branches of Wing Chun you have professed to become an expert on regarding their histories. How much actual research have you accomplished as a historian with the Pao Fa Lin Wing Chun and Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun lineages to come to your conclusions? Or are you once again dismissing these two systems as 'modern-day marketing devices'?

Legend or fact, regardless - there has existed in public circulation hints of two figures known as Dai Dung Fong of Pao Fa Lin Wing Chun and Hung Gun Biu of Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun. The existence of these two systems alive today that have no relation to the Red Boat Operas sticks out like a sore thumb in your blanket statements about origin theories.

And what about Chi Sim Weng Chun, which also has the Butterfly Swords and several versions of the Wooden Dummy? Or do you now discount that as not falling under the Wing Chun umbrella?

There is are two entire systems not from the Red Boats in tact today, perhaps you've heard of them? Or are you now calling HFYWC and CSWC a bunch of convoluted liars? Are you now calling the leaders of other Wing Chun lineages who say their kung fu originates from Shaolin liars also? Now am I saying take people's word as is? No. I am saying you need to do more research before making an uneducated statement.

There's a lot more, but stories abound and each system wants to preserve their lore as truth. I think we can listen to these stories and check with historical facts and see for ourselves.

Of course, you have to look at why people are insistent that their lore is considered "history".Skepticism is healthy, but when held to the point that it clouds an open mind there is no use for it if you are looking to see the world in full color. You need to do more research.

hunt1

09-23-2007, 01:58 PM

Savi as far as history goes you have been sold a bill of goods if you believe what you posted. Andreas Hoffmans own lineage of Chi Sim Weng Chun clearly states that Wong Wah Bo taught Sum Kam who tought Fung Sui Ching etc. The same Wong Wah Bo that taught Leung Jan. There is no dispute nor has there ever been that Wong Wah Bo was part of the Red boat troops. So by reaching to Chi Sim as back up for your history you only further strengthen the Red Boat connection for all Wing Chun.

You also grasp at historical clouds when you invoke Pao fa Lin wing chun as somehow providing support for your unsuported positions. Kwok Kai a direct student of Pao Fa Lin has stated several times in public that the history of his wing chun should be the same as all other wing chun from Fatshan. All one has to do is see pao fa lin wing chun to know that this is true as it has much in common with all other versions of Fatshan wing chun. It has absolutely nothing in common with HFY other than the commanalities that exist across all versions of wing chun

Hendrik

09-23-2007, 08:48 PM

You want reliable research instead of his says she says and marketing/sale pitch but real stuffs?

Try these , another clip from CCTV of China.

http://mymedia.yam.com/m/1527522

in

additional to the clip I have post on top

http://www.cctv.com/program/zbzg/20070822/101651.shtml

See for yourself what is WCK? what is Shao Lin? why is Qi and Mai...ect matter in WCK and Chinese Martial arts.

ChiSim? NgMui?.... what one needs to know is Lee Man Mao and his trop who was hidden within the Opera waiting to uprise and then uprise. What secret? Hung Gam uprising started the DA CHEN Country and ended after Lee Man Mao passed Away.

As Yik Kam's recorded in his 6.5 pole Kuen Kuit . Half Point of Middle spear (help) settle the TaiPing.

Take a guess what is real what is fantasy on the opera stage. Take a stand what is what.

Game over decades ago. myth solve, IMHO

In a summary,

Core Technical side:

SLT is a creation fusing the White Crane of Fujian and Emei 12 Zhuang or snake from Emei.

History side:

everything link to Lee Man Mao's trop.

Cast in the stone and it cant be wrong, that simple. dont believe me? dig deep and see for yourself.

Hendrik

09-23-2007, 09:02 PM

You are entitled to your opinion, but don't mistake your opinion for fact. There are always two sides to a coin. How much do you really know about the secret societies??? Perhaps your view is also convoluted as you propose others to be.

.

what Opinion?

watch the clip and take it or keep dreaming,

BTW, the book on shao lin shows in the clip is what I qoute in the past.

also, in this clip there are research into the Tien Dee Hui.....

http://www.cctv.com/program/zbzg/20070822/101651.shtml

You dont like it, contact the CCTV and tell them their Chinese research team is wrong but you better have very solid evidents as solid as gold to debunk them.

Savi

09-23-2007, 09:36 PM

There you go again playing your game of twisting words around. On the video the commentator said that the name Southern Shaolin Temple was first mentioned by the Heaven and Earth Society. It was also commented that the Temple had been vanished for many generations - rather than your slant of it being non-existent, and that they have not been able to determine the actual location of the temple.

As for Pao Fa Lin Wing Chun, some info here...

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=97

and a discussion of that same system here:

http://www.hfy108.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1557

Ultimatewingchun

09-23-2007, 09:39 PM

It never ceases to amaze me how the HFY story manages to stay on course within the minds of it's participants when in fact neither Garrett Gee, Benny Meng, or anyone else has ever provided any verifiable proof of it's veracity whatsoever.

Not a shred of it can be verified. So many names, places, events, and dates given out when HFY started to become known to the public, ie.- remember all those articles written in KUNG FU MAGAZINE about 10-12 years ago? - and none of it can be independently established as fact.

A marketing masterpiece, I must say.

I give it even money with the Marco Polo story. :cool: :p

jet64

09-23-2007, 10:44 PM

this may seem like a simple Q to answer....but after my own looking around, it's still not clear.

it was extracted from arm techniques of animal forms. the answer is yes. its from shaolin.

Wayfaring

09-24-2007, 08:08 AM

A marketing masterpiece, I must say.

What I think the marketing masterpiece is is the "traditional" in TWC. This tradition oriented in nobody even knows where it came from and even the existing "masters" don't really believe the explanation given by WC.

Tradition without origin. Is that what we call an oxymoron?

Or is that rather people living in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
:confused:

Just keeping the equilibrium going around here, Victor.

t_niehoff

09-24-2007, 08:48 AM

Really, so how do you explain how Wing Chun ended up with the Butterfly swords and the Wooden Dummy? Those are in fact Shaolin-based tools. How did those things end up in Wing Chun, based on your research?

These things are not "in fact Saholin based tools". They are very common in TCMAs. And except for legend, we can't say they were even at Shaolin.

You are entitled to your opinion, but don't mistake your opinion for fact. There are always two sides to a coin. How much do you really know about the secret societies??? Perhaps your view is also convoluted as you propose others to be.

The evidence -- and lack thereof -- speaks for itself.

Indeed stories and legends are created as a smokescreen for civilians. It would take a real insider with actual connections to find the way through it. What do you know about monks? What do you know about their lifestyle? How educated are you in this field? Based on what you have been presenting on the internet so far, your "research" is very biased.

Legends and stories are also created to sell martial arts and related stuff to the gullible. ;) An "insider with actual connection"? To what?

If you have some evidence that can be independently verified, please share it with us.

You NEED to specify which branches of Wing Chun you have professed to become an expert on regarding their histories. How much actual research have you accomplished as a historian with the Pao Fa Lin Wing Chun and Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun lineages to come to your conclusions? Or are you once again dismissing these two systems as 'modern-day marketing devices'?

Stories and legends are not proof of anything. The truth is that there is no independently verifiable evidence of WCK before the Red Boat era (circa 1850). None. Just stories and legends.

Legend or fact, regardless - there has existed in public circulation hints of two figures known as Dai Dung Fong of Pao Fa Lin Wing Chun and Hung Gun Biu of Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun. The existence of these two systems alive today that have no relation to the Red Boat Operas sticks out like a sore thumb in your blanket statements about origin theories.

Where are the recorded stories or legends of Hung Gun Biu part from Garrett Gee's accounts?

And the "fact" that there are stories of Dai Dung Fong does not make the story true. The story is not evidence, it doesn't prove anything. We don't know when or how the story began. It could have been created a hundred years ago.

And what about Chi Sim Weng Chun, which also has the Butterfly Swords and several versions of the Wooden Dummy? Or do you now discount that as not falling under the Wing Chun umbrella?

The fact that there are "oral histories" do not mean that they are true. These things are not self-proving. There needs to be independently verifiable evidence of sufficient quality to prove the claim (the oral history). The history of WCK is essentially lineage: a line of persons that passed on a certain way of training and/or fighting. The only way to prove WCK history is to prove lineage. You can't do it any other way. Practices, terms, kuit, training devices, etc. can all be adopted into an art at any time. For example, I can adopt BJJ into my WCK and say it is classical WCK that comes from Shaolin. Or, I can adopt Wu Dang hei gong into my WCK and say it came from Wu Dang. The fact that I have these things in my "art" doesn't mean they were always there. The only way to know if person A has a relationship to person B is by showing via a line of persons that B has a connection to A. And that needs to be done with independently verifiable evidence.

When we apply that to WCK lienages, we can only find independently verifiable evidence of WCK going as far back as the Red Boat.

There is are two entire systems not from the Red Boats in tact today, perhaps you've heard of them? Or are you now calling HFYWC and CSWC a bunch of convoluted liars? Are you now calling the leaders of other Wing Chun lineages who say their kung fu originates from Shaolin liars also? Now am I saying take people's word as is? No. I am saying you need to do more research before making an uneducated statement.

First, I wouldn't put weng chun (including Andreas' Chi Sim) in the same hat as HFY. There is adundant evidence of weng chun lineage, history, etc,. that can and has been independently verified. As yet, there is no such evidence pertaining to HFY.

Second, no one is calling anyone a liar. To say that these oral histories are not factually true is a very different thing. A great many stories, legends, etc. are not true. The only way to know if something is true is by looking at the evidence. What we can do is say based on available evidence (evidence that can be independently verified) it appears that WCK "originated" on the Red Boats circa early to mid 1800s and from there moved to certain areas along the Boats route.

Skepticism is healthy, but when held to the point that it clouds an open mind there is no use for it if you are looking to see the world in full color. You need to do more research.

The evidence, and lack thereof, speaks for itself. When we look to independently verifiable evidence of lineage to determine WCK history, the picture is very, very clear.

southernkf

09-24-2007, 10:47 AM

this may seem like a simple Q to answer....but after my own looking around, it's still not clear.

My current thought? Define Shaolin? It seems there are many arguments on the topic. But perhaps it is best to define our meanings/terms. Has wing chun been influeneced by Shaolin? Meaning does it have a connection either strong or weak to the temple? Have key people in it's development have had connections to shaolin? What constitutes any of these?

Typical arts associated with shaolin seem to have a very different flavor. But many of arts that seem to have similarities with wing chun also claim to be shaolin. It is hard to say if something is shaolin because there is little evidence and most oral traditions are contradictory with another. The only consistency seems to be too consistent. There have been claims that many arts tied themselves to the temple, perhaps like people in the US like to claim linkage to the Mayflower (or some other important even) for what ever reason.

I do not beleive shaolin to be the MOTHER of all martial arts. I don't beleive all Kung Fu stemmed from Shaolin. This alone is evident that martial arts were brought into Shaolin and that other arts existed with out involvement. However it does seem to be a breeding ground. Having the luxuray of a community that could devote time and energies to study, development, and refinment of an art is definatly one reason why they flurished and were the core of many arts. I can also imagine that there wasn't just one single unified martial art they taught. I suspect there were several different philisophical view points in fighting. Perhaps this leads to the two or more style theories that we tend to get where different people specialize in one art. The Gee Shim, Bak Mei, and Ng Mui archetypes or founders each seemed to have a very different background which spawned different arts. But it is difficult to know if what the art became was really anything like the art they practiced. Hung Gar has added a lot of stuff since then. Wing Chun has a certain core, but every line seems so much different that it is hard to trace exactly what was practiced, and the core of the various lines of wing chun seems very different from other arts attributed to Ng Mui.

Any ways, I think the short answer is, wing chun oral tradition says yes, but there isn't much to support it currently.

t_niehoff

09-24-2007, 11:45 AM

Good post.

I think Shaolin is mostly legend (yes, the monastery did exist, and there was some exercises associated with it) . . . and has probably had very little influence on the development of TCMAs other than from a legendary or inspirational standpoint.

canglong

09-24-2007, 12:44 PM

Shaolin = young forest

Is this a Ko'an? Who are you?

Before looking at the technical expression of a martial art, you have to understand the essense of Shaolin in the first place.

For starters, an operational definition is:
============
I. Three Treasures of Shaolin
A. Chan
B. Martial Arts
C. Health

For a martial art to be Shaolin, it has to address all three treasures of Shaolin. Each of these treasures can be broken down:

A. Three Treasures of Chan (Also refered to as the three refuges)
1. Buddha (Master)
2. Dharma (Teaching, doctrines)
3. Sangha (family/community)

B. Three Treasures of Shaolin Martial Arts
1. Gong Fa (Specialized Skill)
2. Tao Lu (Sets/ patterns)
3. Ge Dou (Fighting)

C. Three Treasures of Health
1. Essence (Jing)
2. Energy (Qi)
3. Spirit (Shen)
============

A distinction can be made between Northern Shaolin and Southern Shaolin in terms of body mechanics and combat strategy (due to range of combat emphasized) but both Shaolin share the above.

Jeremy R.

In order to best answer these questions it's always good to get an inside understanding of the subject by practicing or studying the history as a member of one its associated groups. From that you will discover that all history dealing with TCMA's are a blend of Oral history, Secret Society History, Chinese Culture and Chinese History (written). From that you can make your own determinations on what is or is not in this case Shaolin.

People like Robert Chu and others have their own agendas to push so they can't objectively answer these questions. They like Robert promote Shaolin in books and varies practicies for profit then shows up on forums like these to contradict themselves only adding confusion to people like yourself.

hendrik would like you to believe the links he post are an indication that Southern Shaolin doesn't exist when in fact all the article suggest is that because of the number of Southern Temples the researchers could not identify the exact Temple associated with certain oral histories.

Originally posted by t_niehoff
I think Shaolin is mostly legend (yes, the monastery did exist, and there was some exercises associated with it)
. . . and has probably had very little influence on the development of TCMAs other than from a legendary or inspirational standpoint. We can answer questions like these for ourselves by studying the art or you can just continue to guess.

Ultimatewingchun

09-24-2007, 01:08 PM

What I think the marketing masterpiece is is the "traditional" in TWC. This tradition oriented in nobody even knows where it came from and even the existing "masters" don't really believe the explanation given by WC.

Tradition without origin. Is that what we call an oxymoron?

Or is that rather people living in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.
:confused:

Just keeping the equilibrium going around here, Victor.

***I DIDN'T SAY that HFY had a monopoly on marketing efficiency, Wayfaring. I was just complimenting their supremacy at it. :D

"Never has so much been backed up by so little".

(I think that's a quote from Christopher Columbus - a great admirer of Mr. Polo). :cool:

Wayfaring

09-24-2007, 01:46 PM

***I DIDN'T SAY that HFY had a monopoly on marketing efficiency, Wayfaring. I was just complimenting their supremacy at it. :D

Ahh, the shiny pot complimenting the sheen on the other pot. Well that's much different, then. :D

Wayfaring

09-24-2007, 01:49 PM

The fact that there are "oral histories" do not mean that they are true. These things are not self-proving. There needs to be independently verifiable evidence of sufficient quality to prove the claim (the oral history).

I agree. Oral tradition doesn't of itself prove anything. Much like your oral tradition on this forum doesn't really prove you exist.

My current theory is that you aren't a real person, just a modified Artificial Intelligence program designed to answer everything in terms of Matt Thorntonisms.

southernkf

09-24-2007, 01:58 PM

People like Robert Chu and others have their own agendas to push so they can't objectively answer these questions. They like Robert promote Shaolin in books and varies practicies for profit then shows up on forums like these to contradict themselves only adding confusion to people like yourself.

I think this touches on a key pont of shaolin. Shaolin was VERY famous. People taught Martial arts publically in pplaces like Canton, Futsan, and Hong Kong. Many schools were availible and how was some one going to make a name for themselves? Perhaps fighting. Challenge the other schools. Another was by linking your school with celeberties in the fighting field. If you were a good fighter but no one knew who you were and how good you were, who would go to your club. People had an "AGENDA". They had a lively hood based on it.

This interesting word seems to popup a lot. But I am not so sure it is as vital. Sure people know what shaolin is, but up until recently I don't think it was a significant selling point. Now, I think it's time has passed. So I don't think many people have an "AGENDA" in perpetuating the Shaolin idea and story. So I am always critical when I see that word as it isn't typically used productivly. I doubt Robert has an AGENDA to promote Shaolin. I suspect he would do well if he accepted or rejected it. I don't think he really PROFITS from this claim. AND it can be argued that making a claim against the common wisdom causes more people to read and would infact generate more interest and perhaps sales.

But in any case, the arguement that wing chun is shaolin stems from what may possibly be from an agenda to sell an art to people who are familiar with the temple.

Anyways, I am always cautious when reading any post that throws out the agenda POV. In fact, I always look around to ensure there isn't anyone on a grassy knoll ready to snip me out at the governments request.

Hendrik

09-24-2007, 04:04 PM

anerlich

09-24-2007, 04:06 PM

People like Robert Chu and others have their own agendas to push so they can't objectively answer these questions.

Everyone has an agenda to push. Including you, Robert, Hendrik, William Cheung, Benny Meng and Garrett Gee. MKF was comprehensive, but there was no way it was objective. Marketing isn't bad per se, as long as you don't try to pretend it's something else like academic history - and even that is subject to more spin than a tornado.

Shaolin is a brand these days, another feature on thie list to be ticked off like cruise control and ABS. Though, unlike Shaolin with MA, those latter features can have uses beyond that of a subject for internet flame wars.

According to Adam Hsu, there was little mention of Shaolin in MA historical texts until comparatively recently. Then everyone jumped on the bandwagon. Some things never change.

canglong

09-24-2007, 04:13 PM

southernkf,
You are entitle to your opinion but your post seems a far way off from woodendumby's question.
The part of my post you focused on was merely pointing out the contradiction of Robert Chu's earlier statements.
Originally posted by Chusauli
Although some families of WCK believe their system has its roots in Shaolin, there is no real proof of WCK beyond the Opera Boat people, so it is in general, speculation. That staement is a contradiction with the facts that Robert claims to study wing chun of which the lineage claims to descend from Shaolin. Robert co-authored the book "Complete Wing Chun" in which a majority of wing chun families claim to descend from Shaolin. At no time did his claims of false legends come into account while reviewing other books in fact Robert even publicly praised the book Legends of Wing Chun Embers of Shaolin.

So again southernkf although what you say may be correct for you and even others it does seem as your reply missed the point of the original post.

chusauli

09-24-2007, 04:36 PM

Actually, I have no agenda to push. I teach WCK semiprivately and don't make a big income from it. I have no stake financially for someone to believe my opinion or not. I don't care to attract a lot of students, nor do I ever advertise my school.

As far as wooden dummies, they abound in many martial arts, not only from Shaolin myths. I never saw a dummy at the Northern Shaolin, and since the Southern temple was destroyed, who knows if there were dummies there. Some oral legends suggest that the Muk Yan Jong is from a mast of a ship. It sounds probable, but I have not seen Red junk opera boats with a Muk Yan Jong on it. So I say it is conjecture. There are also Jong in other systems like Choy Lay Fut, Hung Ga, and other southern fist. This does not mean they all come from Shaolin. This at least shows rational thinking on my part.

As for butterfly knives, well the Buddhist monks are not allowed to carry weapons (see the Brahma Net Sutra) and the pole, Yuet Chan, or 9 ring pole would be more symbolic of a Shaolin weapon. Wu Dip Dao probably were a mainstay Southern weapon, and is found in Hung Ga, Choy Lay Fut, and other southern systems. Interestingly, the knives used by the Siu Dao Wui are almost identical to the WCK ones. So to say that WCK knives are Shaolin does not prove it.

I have no desire to single out a particular family, nor make this a personal issue. I will discuss as long as this thread does not turn into personal attacks. As for Pao Fa Lien's alleged history, it is not in accord with WCK proper, nor the categorization of WCK being a rare, northern internal art. If so, where is it in the North? Why the absence of Northern dialect terminology? Why would they have 10 core forms, whereas other WCK has 3 core sets? It would seem there would be local enrichment and adding of weapons rather than to point to an ancestor creating it. And some of these enhancements are good and enrich a system for people who want to study it.

What makes Shaolin a Shaolin art is its core mechanics. If your art is powered by horse stance (Sei Ping Dai Ma), and you fluctuate from Gung Jin Ma and Wui Ma, and you use a horizontal fist, I would say you are a Shaolin style. Just look at ancient Shaolin forms like Chang Quan, Da Xiao Hong Quan, Pao Quan, Wu Xing Quan, and they are unmistakeable in their power signature. The way WCK issues force is unique and closer to white crane and Emei. So power signature is what defines Shaolin. For example, Choy Lay Fut and Hung Ga are definately Shaolin derived systems, as are Choy Gar, Mok Gar, Fut Gar and other southern fist that move and use a long bridge and big horse. The power signature is Shaolin. But WCK empty hand and knives do not use that. Of course, the Luk Dim Boon Gwun uses those forms, so you can say that is Shaolin.

We really have to look objectively. I do not have all the answers, but meeting many southern fist masters, seeing many tapes in China, reading thousands of martial arts books, and learning WCK first hand , I can use my critical mind to discern what was folklore and legend and compare it to what was history. I am still learning and I could be wrong, too, so I don't dare say that I have the truth.

southernkf

09-24-2007, 05:19 PM

Hi Tony,

I made two replys. The first one in my mind answers the original question as I see it. I don't think the wing chun = shaolin is a easy question to answer. The second question was more of a comment on the word agenda and some thoughts about it. People are quick to toss out agendas, but I don't believe that has much bearing, or atleast doesn't negate comments. It is said in many scientific circles that EVERY one has an agenda and are biased. However, we don't build arguments based on that fact, but rather on facts that support or criticize the studies, observations, theories, methods, etc. In other words, we can do better than cite ones agenda as a reason why some one is wrong or shouldn't be listened to.

Anyways, my statement was partly off topic and didn't address the whole point of the post, as you noted. For that I'm sorry. Just my thought when I saw the Agenda thrown in drew me OFF topic. I blame myself for allowing that to occur, though I wish the original argument made more sense so I wouldn't be as easily distracted. ;)

southernkf,
You are entitle to your opinion but your post seems a far way off from woodendumby's question.
The part of my post you focused on was merely pointing out the contradiction of Robert Chu's earlier statements. That staement is a contradiction with the facts that Robert claims to study wing chun of which the lineage claims to descend from Shaolin. Robert co-authored the book "Complete Wing Chun" in which a majority of wing chun families claim to descend from Shaolin. At no time did his claims of false legends come into account while reviewing other books in fact Robert even publicly praised the book Legends of Wing Chun Embers of Shaolin.

So again southernkf although what you say may be correct for you and even others it does seem as your reply missed the point of the original post.

canglong

09-24-2007, 10:53 PM

Originally posted by Chisauli
Actually, I have no agenda to push.

Originally psoted by anerlich
Everyone has an agenda to push.
Obviously anerlich got it right.
Originally posted by Chusauli
What makes Shaolin a Shaolin art is its core mechanics. If your art is powered by horse stance (Sei Ping Dai Ma), and you fluctuate from Gung Jin Ma and Wui Ma, and you use a horizontal fist, I would say you are a Shaolin style.Robert that is your opinion but that doesn't make it true so it's no more a starting point for understanding Shaolin than the quote in my earlier post.

My point was and still is there is no need to answer the question with all the editorializing when the question itself is best answered through experience. Any other answer is bound to have self gratifying spin. Just read hendrik's post for an example.

woodendumby

09-24-2007, 11:14 PM

LOL....ok, I don't care anymore.:(

Liddel

09-24-2007, 11:32 PM

People seeking a place of refuge for whatever reason were often taken into temples and looked after, as long as they allowed themselves to be subjected to the agendas of the people running the place... namely religion based stuff.

Many of these 'visiters', were fighters / bandits / street thugs etc amoung many others, who offered the only thing they had to give in return for food and a roof over thier head....fighting skills.

So alot of what today is considered 'Shaolin' in fact was born long before the monks put thier spin on it...

This is one of thousands of instances that is no more important or true than any other legend.

I look at it this way -

Auz has hungry Jacks - Nz Has burger king. As long as the burger tastes good i dont care which place it came from.. niether should you.
It has little relevance IMO.

As you were.
DREW

Toby

09-24-2007, 11:43 PM

I look at it this way -

Auz has hungry Jacks - Nz Has burger king. As long as the burger tastes good i dont care which place it came from ...This does not compute?! I haven't eaten HJs for at least 5 years but unless things have changed there's nothing good that comes from those places.

Mr Punch

09-24-2007, 11:45 PM

Robert that is your opinion but that doesn't make it true so it's no more a starting point for understanding Shaolin than the quote in my earlier post.

I am still learning and I could be wrong, too, so I don't dare say that I have the truth.

My point was and still is there is no need to answer the question with all the editorializing when the question itself is best answered through experience. Any other answer is bound to have self gratifying spin. Just read hendrik's post for an example.??? :confused: :rolleyes:

I am still learning and I could be wrong, too, so I don't dare say that I have the truth.

LOL....ok, I don't care anymore.:(For once mate, I'm with you completely! :D

t_niehoff

09-25-2007, 05:45 AM

Actually, I have no agenda to push. I teach WCK semiprivately and don't make a big income from it. I have no stake financially for someone to believe my opinion or not. I don't care to attract a lot of students, nor do I ever advertise my school.

And I would add that you don't use "history" to market or validate your methods.

As far as wooden dummies, they abound in many martial arts, not only from Shaolin myths. I never saw a dummy at the Northern Shaolin, and since the Southern temple was destroyed, who knows if there were dummies there. Some oral legends suggest that the Muk Yan Jong is from a mast of a ship. It sounds probable, but I have not seen Red junk opera boats with a Muk Yan Jong on it. So I say it is conjecture. There are also Jong in other systems like Choy Lay Fut, Hung Ga, and other southern fist. This does not mean they all come from Shaolin. This at least shows rational thinking on my part.

How do we know that wooden dummies were even at Shaolin? From stories. Stories. Legends. The story does not prove itself as true. There is no independently verifiable evidence. It could be that Shaolin created the dummy and many arts took that as inspiration (or took it from other arts). Or, it could be that some art(s) with the dummy created the legend of Shaolin's dummy to validate or market itself. There is no way of knowing except by independently verifiable evidence. And that doesn't exist.

As for butterfly knives, well the Buddhist monks are not allowed to carry weapons (see the Brahma Net Sutra) and the pole, Yuet Chan, or 9 ring pole would be more symbolic of a Shaolin weapon. Wu Dip Dao probably were a mainstay Southern weapon, and is found in Hung Ga, Choy Lay Fut, and other southern systems. Interestingly, the knives used by the Siu Dao Wui are almost identical to the WCK ones. So to say that WCK knives are Shaolin does not prove it.

The pole is essentially a staple weapon in most CMAs. The butterfly knives a staple in most southern fist.

I have no desire to single out a particular family, nor make this a personal issue. I will discuss as long as this thread does not turn into personal attacks. As for Pao Fa Lien's alleged history, it is not in accord with WCK proper, nor the categorization of WCK being a rare, northern internal art. If so, where is it in the North? Why the absence of Northern dialect terminology? Why would they have 10 core forms, whereas other WCK has 3 core sets? It would seem there would be local enrichment and adding of weapons rather than to point to an ancestor creating it. And some of these enhancements are good and enrich a system for people who want to study it.

Yup.

What makes Shaolin a Shaolin art is its core mechanics. If your art is powered by horse stance (Sei Ping Dai Ma), and you fluctuate from Gung Jin Ma and Wui Ma, and you use a horizontal fist, I would say you are a Shaolin style. Just look at ancient Shaolin forms like Chang Quan, Da Xiao Hong Quan, Pao Quan, Wu Xing Quan, and they are unmistakeable in their power signature. The way WCK issues force is unique and closer to white crane and Emei. So power signature is what defines Shaolin. For example, Choy Lay Fut and Hung Ga are definately Shaolin derived systems, as are Choy Gar, Mok Gar, Fut Gar and other southern fist that move and use a long bridge and big horse. The power signature is Shaolin. But WCK empty hand and knives do not use that. Of course, the Luk Dim Boon Gwun uses those forms, so you can say that is Shaolin.

I think the term "Shaolin art" doesn't refers to arts derived or evolving from Shaolin but from those arts that share certain common characteristics - regardless of how they came into being - with what we now call Shaolin. "Power signature" -- really just body mechanics -- is just one of those characteristics. And the mechanics we use derive from what you are trying to do, the approach we are taking to fighting, the tools we are trying to use. You mention that the pole uses Shaolin "power signature". Yes, it uses that sort of mechanics because you can only use the long pole with those sorts of mechanics. Shaolin-type arts are long range methods of fighting (like kickboxing); most southern fist is very short range (inside, clinch) fighting. So the different approaches use different tools which require different mechanics.

We really have to look objectively. I do not have all the answers, but meeting many southern fist masters, seeing many tapes in China, reading thousands of martial arts books, and learning WCK first hand , I can use my critical mind to discern what was folklore and legend and compare it to what was history. I am still learning and I could be wrong, too, so I don't dare say that I have the truth.

No, we don't know the truth, and I doubt very much if we ever will. All we can do, and probably ever will be able to do, is trace WCK via lineage back to the Red Boat era. Beyond that, all is legend, story.

donbdc

09-25-2007, 06:22 AM

t_niehoff

09-25-2007, 07:34 AM

Why is this question important. Who cares who invented it? Is it effective, can you use it to defend yourself? I really don't understand all of the lineage in fightig and historical BS. So what if it comes from the docks of Jersey!
Don

The question is unimportant. But some try to use the stories, the legends, etc. to market themselves and/or validate what they do to the inexperienced and gullible.

FWIW, I don't think anyone "invented" WCK, any more than any specific person "invented" boxing or wrestling. In my view, WCK evolved over time as did boxing and wrestling, absorbing a number of influences, and later came to be "codified" on the Red Boat. This is why most southern fist looks so similar; just different packaging on the same general approach to fighting.

Wayfaring

09-25-2007, 09:06 AM

How much has your SLT progress ? That tell the truth without argue.

Hendrik,

What do you mean more precisely by "how much has your SLT progress?"

Wayfaring

09-25-2007, 09:25 AM

IWhat makes Shaolin a Shaolin art is its core mechanics. If your art is powered by horse stance (Sei Ping Dai Ma), and you fluctuate from Gung Jin Ma and Wui Ma, and you use a horizontal fist, I would say you are a Shaolin style. Just look at ancient Shaolin forms like Chang Quan, Da Xiao Hong Quan, Pao Quan, Wu Xing Quan, and they are unmistakeable in their power signature. The way WCK issues force is unique and closer to white crane and Emei. So power signature is what defines Shaolin. For example, Choy Lay Fut and Hung Ga are definately Shaolin derived systems, as are Choy Gar, Mok Gar, Fut Gar and other southern fist that move and use a long bridge and big horse. The power signature is Shaolin. But WCK empty hand and knives do not use that. Of course, the Luk Dim Boon Gwun uses those forms, so you can say that is Shaolin.

We really have to look objectively. I do not have all the answers, but meeting many southern fist masters, seeing many tapes in China, reading thousands of martial arts books, and learning WCK first hand , I can use my critical mind to discern what was folklore and legend and compare it to what was history. I am still learning and I could be wrong, too, so I don't dare say that I have the truth.

Robert,

I haven't read as many historical books as you have or encountered as many southern chinese kung fu systems as you.

However, as a teen I studied a 5 animal system that migrated through Vietnam with oral traditions reportedly originating from Shaolin. This system included the tiger and crane animals, not the snake. From what I have read, the animal imitation originated from Shaolin temples and aspects spread out to many other southern systems.

So the main thing I'm not understanding about your position and Hendrik's is about WCK coming from crane (which I understood to be a Shaolin animal form), and Emei, which I'm not as familiar with but thought it sounded like some derivative of the 18 lohan hands. I mean my understanding about a Shaolin connection was that it was a kind of cultural center for martial arts training. People brought different skills and backgrounds both into and out of that environment and cross-trained them.

So is it that you guys have some kind of Crane historical connection with a line that trained outside of or parallel to the Shaolin? How is it you can be so sure that the crane training didn't come from Shaolin interaction 300 yrs earlier? Or vice versa?

If you're talking about power generation and the differences maybe that's like the core area everyone likes to compare. I don't see huge differences in the shock power engine of WCK and some of the lohan based (what was called "noi cong" - 18 lohan exercises, ring forms, advanced) training from my 5 animals system. The same root to ground, full body coil, shock power, transference of "air". I mean maybe they go about it completely differently in other southern systems.

Anyway, just carrying on a conversation about some historical points I didn't understand. I probably know a lot less than you overall on the topic.

ChangHFY

09-25-2007, 09:51 AM

A few things I would like to mention:

Coming from a Ip Man Ving Tsun & Hung Fa Yi background as well as a Northern Shaolin background.

For myself, based on everything I've witnessed that I can only speak for the Hung Fa Yi Pai itself. But I feel that it definitely has a Shaolin ancestry. (again I can only speak for the Hung Fa Yi system that I study not anyone elses system)

First of all one thing to note is:
Though Shaolin has various ways to generate power (lik) or gihng (jing).
This type of perspective would only be viable based on a personal showmanship or personal area of skill, and can not speak for everyones ability to generate fa jing or the system that is being trained.
For example Bruce Lee was famous for his one inch punch, or some internal martial artist are famous for the ways they demonstrate their fa jing ability.
But each practitioner would demonstrate these skills some what different based on their personal make up.

In Hung Fa Yi we see the connection that Hung Fa Yi has with a Shaolin ancestry.

Not so much in technique perspectives: as you cant identify anyone system based on techniques as anyone practitioner can utilize various methods and differing techniques.

But in Hung Fa Yi we see the system logic itself.
From the terminology utilized and ingrained in the system, to the methods being trained and handed down from the Byun Jyun to his Todai (Dai Ji).

We see the methods being trained from the perspective of the Saam Mo Kiu (three connecting bridges) all the way to the Time/Space/Energy (causation) paradigm. Then from their we have the Seals that show the progression of the binary levels

This is only the surface level and yet shows a truely strong Shaolin identity.

The true artifact of Hung Fa Yi is being presented from the Byun Jyun himself.
and comprises of the strong culture that is being transmited, the art form and methods that are being handed down from the Grandmaster.

Then we have the Three treasures of Shaolin:
Health (important to note both internal and external) (Nei/Wai)/
Chan methods (Faat)/
and the Gong Fu itself (Wu Gong)

Another important note is what Chu Laoshi had mentioned that the truth is really in the art itself not so much in the history.
As history in relation to CMA is generally coming from an oral background so it may contain some falsified information.

Again this seems to be a great topic.
And Chu Laoshi its great to see you frequenting the forums!

southernkf

09-25-2007, 10:25 AM

There seems to be a lot of discussion about shaolin, though it seems to me their isn't any knowledge of what exactly IS shaolin? Terence questioned even if dummies were present in shaolin. How do we know they were? Others say they feel their art is connected with shaolin. If we are basing this on oral traditions, then we have to accept the fact that most oral traditions are contradictory. I think a lot of people are making claims that simply can't be backed up. Rather their are stating their wishes or oral traditions. Those arn't the same as truth.

Someone questioned Roberts discription of Shaolin arts, based I suspect on todays execpted shaolin derived arts rather than what was actually practiced there. To me, his statement makes sense and I would love to hear examples where is "not neccesarily so" point of view is incorrect. I suspect many arts were practiced at shaolin, and probably that their isn't a single method any more than you will find a single fighting method in the military(including hand to hand).

chusauli

09-25-2007, 11:44 AM

Robert,

I haven't read as many historical books as you have or encountered as many southern chinese kung fu systems as you.

However, as a teen I studied a 5 animal system that migrated through Vietnam with oral traditions reportedly originating from Shaolin. This system included the tiger and crane animals, not the snake. From what I have read, the animal imitation originated from Shaolin temples and aspects spread out to many other southern systems.

So the main thing I'm not understanding about your position and Hendrik's is about WCK coming from crane (which I understood to be a Shaolin animal form), and Emei, which I'm not as familiar with but thought it sounded like some derivative of the 18 lohan hands. I mean my understanding about a Shaolin connection was that it was a kind of cultural center for martial arts training. People brought different skills and backgrounds both into and out of that environment and cross-trained them.

So is it that you guys have some kind of Crane historical connection with a line that trained outside of or parallel to the Shaolin? How is it you can be so sure that the crane training didn't come from Shaolin interaction 300 yrs earlier? Or vice versa?

If you're talking about power generation and the differences maybe that's like the core area everyone likes to compare. I don't see huge differences in the shock power engine of WCK and some of the lohan based (what was called "noi cong" - 18 lohan exercises, ring forms, advanced) training from my 5 animals system. The same root to ground, full body coil, shock power, transference of "air". I mean maybe they go about it completely differently in other southern systems.

Anyway, just carrying on a conversation about some historical points I didn't understand. I probably know a lot less than you overall on the topic.

Wayfaring,

Shaolin 5 animals is different than Fujian White Crane. Shaolin 5 animal was allegedly based on Bai Yu Feng and Gwok Yuen of the Shaolin Temple, whereas Fujian White Crane is based on Fang Qi Niang. They have different body mechanics. The former is bigger, with bigger horse and movement; whereas the other short bridge shocking power, more akin to WCK.

You can see a lot if you look at Shaolin's 5 animal form and Fujian White Crane. A look at youtube.com and you can see differences - of course, there are many DVD and VCD's from China in which you can see the differences.

I think a lot of issues is that people cannot overcome some of the language barrier and know what they are looking at. Also, many systems out there have unique local features and may differ from the "orthodox".

Best regards,

Hendrik

09-25-2007, 03:31 PM

Hendrik,

What do you mean more precisely by "how much has your SLT progress?"

simple, all CMA has a core process. and this core process is used to train thier set to get the result of the set design for.

For WCK, SLT is the core set, and if the applied of the Shao Lin Core process could get the result, one's SLT with the correct process will indeed make the person's power progress within hours instead of years.

If the Shao Lin core process is not fitting the SLT then there will be minimum result or even negative result. There we know first hand if the process works?

and

BTW, what is the Shao Lin Core Process? up to now, I have not seen anyone mention it .

As for the Emei, anyone using the Emei 12 Zhuang process of Snake slide pupal moves to train thier SLT will know, it is night and day different between using it or not. Try it for yourself and see.

in the ancient time, if one have the set without the Core Process, then one doesnt have the art even if one could mimic all the sets or doing some application. The power generation or Jing just not feel right or always something missing in that case.

Sorry to open this can of Worm. but it is time to address how is one train thier hip/lower and upper back with the SLT or CK or BJ. because this got to do with the core process or the Technology which make WCK WCK. without this technology take down is almost guarentee because the structure is hollow dynamically.

Peace

Wayfaring

09-27-2007, 07:47 AM

simple, all CMA has a core process. and this core process is used to train thier set to get the result of the set design for.

For WCK, SLT is the core set, and if the applied of the Shao Lin Core process could get the result, one's SLT with the correct process will indeed make the person's power progress within hours instead of years.

If the Shao Lin core process is not fitting the SLT then there will be minimum result or even negative result. There we know first hand if the process works?

and

BTW, what is the Shao Lin Core Process? up to now, I have not seen anyone mention it .

As for the Emei, anyone using the Emei 12 Zhuang process of Snake slide pupal moves to train thier SLT will know, it is night and day different between using it or not. Try it for yourself and see.

in the ancient time, if one have the set without the Core Process, then one doesnt have the art even if one could mimic all the sets or doing some application. The power generation or Jing just not feel right or always something missing in that case.

Sorry to open this can of Worm. but it is time to address how is one train thier hip/lower and upper back with the SLT or CK or BJ. because this got to do with the core process or the Technology which make WCK WCK. without this technology take down is almost guarentee because the structure is hollow dynamically.

Peace

OK - so you are mostly coming from a power generation or Jing perspective on classifying systems and tracking progress. I think I understand a little more.
The question in SLT is "How muich does your practice of SLT open up the power generation engine that is specific to your WCK?"

I am less familiar with Emei 12 Zhuang. Is this a primarily snake animal style? I can look on youtube. Anything you can give me to educate me more on this style? I'm guessing there's some differences there with power generation from anything shaolin or southern CMA?

Wayfaring

09-27-2007, 07:59 AM

Wayfaring,

Shaolin 5 animals is different than Fujian White Crane. Shaolin 5 animal was allegedly based on Bai Yu Feng and Gwok Yuen of the Shaolin Temple, whereas Fujian White Crane is based on Fang Qi Niang. They have different body mechanics. The former is bigger, with bigger horse and movement; whereas the other short bridge shocking power, more akin to WCK.

You can see a lot if you look at Shaolin's 5 animal form and Fujian White Crane. A look at youtube.com and you can see differences - of course, there are many DVD and VCD's from China in which you can see the differences.

I think a lot of issues is that people cannot overcome some of the language barrier and know what they are looking at. Also, many systems out there have unique local features and may differ from the "orthodox".

Best regards,

Robert,

Thx for resource directions. I've looked at a few clips on youtube. I will say from my personal experience that yes the Shaolin 5 animal forms generally have larger horse and movement than WCK - a longer style. I'm not so sure personally about the bridge shocking power - that from what I trained was the internals to all 5 animals, not separated out into crane, tiger, etc. Maybe the short shocking power was more specific to tiger, which I was given personally as my form to specialty train within the system. That system migrated through another country and was said to be blended anyway.

Anyway I'll look into more the differences in the crane systems with the names you provided and see what I can see.

Hendrik

09-27-2007, 10:48 AM

OK - so you are mostly coming from a power generation or Jing perspective on classifying systems and tracking progress. I think I understand a little more.
The question in SLT is "How muich does your practice of SLT open up the power generation engine that is specific to your WCK?"

I am less familiar with Emei 12 Zhuang. Is this a primarily snake animal style? I can look on youtube. Anything you can give me to educate me more on this style? I'm guessing there's some differences there with power generation from anything shaolin or southern CMA?

Until one learn it from a sifu and have the experience, one doesnt know. It is similar to if one never see a color TV one cant talk about it or think about it with a Black and White TV paradigm.

As in the clip of the China CCTV, CMA has its paradigm and if one is not familiar and experience with this paradigm. Mind speculation cant get one there.

So, get a teacher who know and learn, the rest doesnt get you too far. IMHO.

BTW:

it is NOT about

"so you are mostly coming from a power generation or Jing perspective on classifying systems and tracking progress. "

perspective,

it is about looking into the SOUL of the art. if one doesnt KNOW the Soul one doesnt KNOW the Art. for ART is the Voice of the SOUL.

The bottom line is ---- It is about Energy Structure Signature which is deeper then the power generation signature. I am convinced and realized there are lots of things we are missing these days.

Wayfaring

09-27-2007, 08:12 PM

The bottom line is ---- It is about Energy Structure Signature which is deeper then the power generation signature. I am convinced and realized there are lots of things we are missing these days.

I'm sure you are right. I was just using words to express an idea. I don't know what you mean by Energy Structure Signature, and how it would differ from power generation signature.

Can you explain?

osprey3883

09-28-2007, 09:10 AM

Hendrik,

Although the things you post may sound valuable to you, it seems like many times when someone tries to pin you down to specifics you start running away.

example-

perspective,
it is about looking into the SOUL of the art. if one doesnt KNOW the Soul one doesnt KNOW the Art. for ART is the Voice of the SOUL.

Sometimes to me this type of funny language is like the chewbaca defense on southpark-
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chewbacca+defense

How has your "looking into the soul of the art" transfered to your fighting ability?

Matt

JPinAZ

09-28-2007, 09:17 AM

Hendrik,

Although the things you post may sound valuable to you, it seems like many times when someone tries to pin you down to specifics you start running away.

example-

Sometimes to me this type of funny language is like the chewbaca defense on southpark-
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=chewbacca+defense

How has your "looking into the soul of the art" transfered to your fighting ability?

Matt

Heh. I honestly have a hard time following much of anything Hendrick says here. And, it's not for a lack of trying either. Maybe he could explain in 'plain words' just what he means..

Hendrik

09-28-2007, 09:32 AM

I'm sure you are right. I was just using words to express an idea. I don't know what you mean by Energy Structure Signature, and how it would differ from power generation signature.

Can you explain?

How effective is using only black and white colors to explain rainbow color?

cant be done. it is even misleading reading books and watching DVD and thinking one knows. that is what I find out in the hard way. why one needs a sifu to guide one into the realm or state to see for himself what is rainbow color.

Hendrik

09-28-2007, 09:37 AM

Heh. I honestly have a hard time following much of anything Hendrick says here. And, it's not for a lack of trying either. Maybe he could explain in 'plain words' just what he means..

I would also have a hard time to know what I am talking about today 5 years ago.

So, the bottom line is only if we got into 3 dimentional world we could know what is a 3 dimension world is.

Just Cant explain the 3 dimensional world with a 2 dimensional plane.

So, forget about the attemp of using a 2 dimensional black and white picture to explain what is a rainbow.

I tell you the truth here. and somedays you will know.

There is rainbow, and somedays, if you keep digging you will see it. for we all have the capability to see it. only we need to develop ourself upto that energy state. and to develop ourself we need Kung Fa or the cultivation process which is not in general available yet.

donbdc

09-28-2007, 09:41 AM

God I want whatever you smoke!:)

JPinAZ

09-28-2007, 10:30 AM

I would also have a hard time to know what I am talking about today 5 years ago.

So, the bottom line is only if we got into 3 dimentional world we could know what is a 3 dimension world is.

Just Cant explain the 3 dimensional world with a 2 dimensional plane.

So, forget about the attemp of using a 2 dimensional black and white picture to explain what is a rainbow.

I tell you the truth here. and somedays you will know.

There is rainbow, and somedays, if you keep digging you will see it. for we all have the capability to see it. only we need to develop ourself upto that energy state. and to develop ourself we need Kung Fa or the cultivation process which is not in general available yet.

So basically, if you can't expain, and no one would understand, what the heck are you even saying??

B&W, rainbows - yeah, now I get it... :rolleyes:

Hendrik

09-28-2007, 03:14 PM

So basically, if you can't expain, and no one would understand, what the heck are you even saying??

B&W, rainbows - yeah, now I get it... :rolleyes:

You could be right.

However,

What if those who has the experience on the Energy Signature knows exactly what I am talking about because they know the description. While you are looking for explaination?

See, what you also dont know is that your mind only can speculate the past not the future. and what if whatever I am talking about is not in the data bank of your past?

It is just very naive to think as soon as one use logic one can know everything. Nope, in the real world that is not sufficient and limited.

I am trying to share with you all a different paradigm which the chinese ma is based on in the ancient time. until you get there, no one can explain to you. and even if any one try, your mind will still cant percive that intelecturely that is a reality I have learn in a very very hard way and spending decades.

check with those who could evoke thier Zhen Qi at will or drop thier Brain wave. Those could be measure Via infra-red or EEG.

Only when one is there, then one knows. what good is explaination? Those people could influence the infra-red and EEG at thier will easily. Could we do that will all the explaination and theory? Nope.

Finally,

it is usual that honest talk will not be appreciated. That is just life.

Savi

09-28-2007, 10:27 PM

And you should take your own advice, Hendrik.

JPinAZ

09-29-2007, 07:19 AM

Wayfaring

09-29-2007, 09:33 AM

How effective is using only black and white colors to explain rainbow color?

cant be done. it is even misleading reading books and watching DVD and thinking one knows. that is what I find out in the hard way. why one needs a sifu to guide one into the realm or state to see for himself what is rainbow color.

I think I get what you are saying. Hands on instruction is always the clearest, from someone who knows what they are doing. Books and videos can help but are less valuable, like trying to understand colors using black and white media.

Forums are probably even less effective than books or videos.

Understanding that, we're just doing the best we can on internet forums to have a meaningful conversation, which I agree at times is like using black and white to explain color.

Even with all those limitations, is there value to discussing energy structure signature? You say those that have it know it. But what if they describe it using different black and white words than "energy structure signature?" Where does that leave us? With no common ground and unable to converse? Judging one another whether we understand or not?

Hendrik

09-29-2007, 03:40 PM

Even with all those limitations, is there value to discussing energy structure signature?

You say those that have it know it.

But what if they describe it using different black and white words than "energy structure signature?" Where does that leave us? With no common ground and unable to converse? Judging one another whether we understand or not?

Let's make a black and white analogy.

The goal of this analogy is to lead you to "see" what is there but not to know the issue itself.

Energy Structure Signature could be analogy as the engine and transmission of the four wheel drive.

since it is a four wheel drive, all wheel must be able to be activate seperately and in integration as a group or whole. So, here, until one has experience what does it mean by " all will could be activate seperately and as a whole." that is not a concept those who drive a two wheel drive could properly imagine.

Thus, if one speculate what a four wheel drive is, that speculation mostly will mostly cause misleading or trouble for one to understand what is a four wheel drive.

Not to mention, there is true four wheel drive such as what one has in the Toyota 4 runner, there is electronics automatic control four wheel drive which is used in the Acura....etc. Those are Energy STructure signature as an analogy.

So, finally,
It is identical to as what it said in the spiritual practice.

If one intend to know God, one need to meditate or doing prayer. Reading books will only lead one to know ABOUT God but not God.

It is with this analogy, I would like to leave you the reality of ---- until one doing prayer, one just cant read books and thinking one knows God and start speculating and discuss the God.

In today's ego drive forum where most of us think we could discuss everything based on our logical speculation without knowing our logic could be 100000 miles off. such as until one knows what is Qi how is one going to discuss the Ancient Traditional Chinese Martial art paradigm? Just Cant.

and it is evidentally using Qi as the second component beside COG to move the body create a faster shift...

so, without an experience will not able to know what is going on because one knows COG but one have no idea what is and how is when the qi or the second component is involved.

and BTW, what good is going for deep discussion of Qi activate movement where none know what is Qi and what is going on? See, these stuffs is not up for intepretation or speculation but description, those who knows it just describe it without interpretation and speculation. One just dont need to interperate or speculate, one just describe. But, these days, often we all would like to be right for sake of ego, disregards of we have no clue what we are talking about.

Thus, my goal of sharing what I have experience here is not to share the subject but to present a message ------- there are something our there we need to investigate in. and until we have the basic of these subject we cant discuss because we dont know and why speculate to cause missleading?

peace

Hendrik

09-29-2007, 03:59 PM

Hendrick, what are you even talking about??
I agree with matt - this is all very 'funny talk'.

You start speaking of things, then you say no one can understand even if you explain. You talk of rainbows and B&W, then pretty much condesend us all by saying only you can really understand. While I get the metaphore, you still are not saying anything! What is it you are even here to say, if no one would understand?
Why even come here and babble like you are if you have nothing to share?
And what does it even have to do with WC and/or Shaolin?

I think you might have taken a sip out of the wrong tea cup. Keep the paint thinner away from the table when you are drinking tea...

it has todo with WC and Shao lin because one needs to get to a deeper level of the cell to investigate the DNA of the subject.

For those who only see the surface, sure DNA could not be understood and even imagine.

But DNA exist

and until you know what is DNA and the pattern of the DNA why speculate and why judge or comment when others is sending a message telling the public, there is a DNA exist and we must get there to know the full story?

Certainly for some to accept the exist of DNA will be lost face for them for they always think thier expertise in the skin deep superfical could answer everything. But too bad that is not the case. Until one gets into the DNA one just dont know a bigger part of the full story.

Savi

09-30-2007, 12:48 AM

No one has yet to explain what is Shaolin DNA, and why they believe WC DNA is not a match.

Hendrik

09-30-2007, 10:16 AM

No one has yet to explain what is Shaolin DNA, and why they believe WC DNA is not a match.

Isnt it that is your job to repsent to all of us?

I explain the Emei 12 Zhuang Snake slide pulpa move DNA and White Crane DNA and propose these DNA fit into SLT well and could produce result.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKWVOc2HOig

You are one of the group of people believe in Shao Lin is the mother of WCK.

So, now convince me, convert me, with your evidence of where is Shao Lin, What type of Shao Lin, what is the Shao Lin DNA, and how is this Shao Lin DNA creates the SLT of WCK?

not to mention up to now, all the talk about Chan Chan Chan, but what is Chan? NONE have present that and also NONE was present Clearly in any WCK BOOK.

if one cant even present clearly what is CHAN in a precise and concise way what do one really know? Just some chinese terms translations?

Thus, why dont you make a youtube and present your case to let us learn from you.

Make my day, I am open for you to convert me.

Savi

09-30-2007, 01:56 PM

Isnt it that is your job to repsent to all of us?

I explain the Emei 12 Zhuang Snake slide pulpa move DNA and White Crane DNA and propose these DNA fit into SLT well and could produce result.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zKWVOc2HOig

You are one of the group of people believe in Shao Lin is the mother of WCK.

So, now convince me, convert me, with your evidence of where is Shao Lin, What type of Shao Lin, what is the Shao Lin DNA, and how is this Shao Lin DNA creates the SLT of WCK?

not to mention up to now, all the talk about Chan Chan Chan, but what is Chan? NONE have present that and also NONE was present Clearly in any WCK BOOK.

if one cant even present clearly what is CHAN in a precise and concise way what do one really know? Just some chinese terms translations?

Thus, why dont you make a youtube and present your case to let us learn from you.

Make my day, I am open for you to convert me.You don't get it, do you? Every time you open that big mouth of yours about where Wing Chun comes from - you better be d@mn clear that you are only talking about Yik Kam Wing Chun and no one else's.

Convert you? You've got to be f-ing kidding me. That's the most stupid and ridiculous joke. You are a nobody to me. I don't give a rat's @ss about where you stand but don't dare to Fuhkin' presume to tell me where my Wing Chun roots come from when you don't have a godd d@mn clue about it.

I could care less about telling you about HFY or Shaolin "DNA" because you've proven time and time again how far up your @ss your head really is. I'm not here to educate anyone about my Wing Chun.

You wanna present your case about Wing Chun origins? I have no problem with that at all, BUT you and Robert need to qualify your comments on this matter as to which branch(es) of Wing Chun you are talking about. That's one of your biggest problems. You don't do that. If you did, which would only make logical sense, we wouldn't be this far into the thread.

Hendrik

09-30-2007, 08:57 PM

You don't get it, do you? Every time you open that big mouth of yours about where Wing Chun comes from - you better be d@mn clear that you are only talking about Yik Kam Wing Chun and no one else's.

Convert you? You've got to be f-ing kidding me. That's the most stupid and ridiculous joke. You are a nobody to me. I don't give a rat's @ss about where you stand but don't dare to Fuhkin' presume to tell me where my Wing Chun roots come from when you don't have a godd d@mn clue about it.

I could care less about telling you about HFY or Shaolin "DNA" because you've proven time and time again how far up your @ss your head really is. I'm not here to educate anyone about my Wing Chun.

You wanna present your case about Wing Chun origins? I have no problem with that at all, BUT you and Robert need to qualify your comments on this matter as to which branch(es) of Wing Chun you are talking about. That's one of your biggest problems. You don't do that. If you did, which would only make logical sense, we wouldn't be this far into the thread.

May the divine bless you with wisdom.

peace

osprey3883

10-01-2007, 10:02 AM

Hendrik,
Again, it seems to me to be funny talk-

How effective is using only black and white colors to explain rainbow color?

cant be done. it is even misleading reading books and watching DVD and thinking one knows. that is what I find out in the hard way. why one needs a sifu to guide one into the realm or state to see for himself what is rainbow color.

IMO when asked to get specific you often become extremely general. As an example your discussion about energy signature. You have many words, but say very little.
You push that WC comes from White Crane, if so shouldn't we have some common points of reference with which we can dialog???
But instead you pass yourself off as an authority who has the answers, but can't explain because we are all unqualified to understand. If we are all so unqualified, why waste your time??

Instead you should focus on sharing where your family came from. IMO way too many people get into saying this is where WC came from when they should be sharing it from a perspective of where their families WC came from.

Matt

southernkf

10-01-2007, 10:13 AM

No one has yet to explain what is Shaolin DNA, and why they believe WC DNA is not a match.

Hi Savi,

Lets start simple. Make a list of arts that are shaolin. Then, lets find what they have in common and what they don't. Although this isn't science, but rather subjective, I think it can help us in a general sense. Next is to look at the skills inherent in wing chun and see if they apply.

So, what is the list we will start with?

osprey3883

10-01-2007, 10:29 AM

Robert,
Sometimes it is hard for me to see where you are coming from.
On the the 23rd you say this-

As for real history, we at least know that WCK is not Shaolin. It never came from Shaolin, Northern or Southern, but certainly has elements of different martial systems.

and the next day you say-

We really have to look objectively. I do not have all the answers, but meeting many southern fist masters, seeing many tapes in China, reading thousands of martial arts books, and learning WCK first hand , I can use my critical mind to discern what was folklore and legend and compare it to what was history. I am still learning and I could be wrong, too, so I don't dare say that I have the truth.

Is it that things are still being explored, or that you know for sure where WC came from?

Matt

Savi

10-01-2007, 01:12 PM

Matt,

You know that Robert and Hendrik purposefully make these bullSh!t blanket statements about everyone else's Wing Chun systems to get attention and pass themselves off as authorities on every else's Wing Chun histories. Who the hell are they to represent the entire community??? They don't qualify their statements, and they never have until after people question them.

THEN they backpedal when you call them on it.

Hendrik:
May the divine bless you with wisdom.

peace

Robert:
As for real history, we at least know that WCK is not Shaolin. It never came from Shaolin, Northern or Southern, but certainly has elements of different martial systems......

I am still learning and I could be wrong, too, so I don't dare say that I have the truth.Their comments on Wing Chun history are indirect insults and attacks against the families who have passed down the very traditions, cultures, philosophies, and oral histories of their respective lineages. They are basically calling every teacher and master and leader liars when they don't qualify their sh!t. Though some of the vocal ones these days find little to no value in these things, that is no reason to f-ing p!ss on it. Everything has it's place - not just the combat aspects. People value what interests them and discard what they don't value; human nature. That's totally different than indirectly insulting other families. Better to keep your mouth shut than cross another's line. That's called respect.

Hendrik wants to talk about Chi Gung, talk about Chan, talk about his research, and show off how much he knows about everyone else's Wing Chun, but how the hell can he come here and pretend to be an expert when he got put down on his @SS in three moves by a Shaolin Master, Andreas Hoffman. The only results he has in comparing his Wing Chun DNA and Shaolin DNA is that he can't pass the test. This phony guy is all talk.

Bless me with wisdom, Hendrik? You are so full of jokes, aren't you? You are not here for any serious and genuine discussion on Wing Chun and you know it.

canglong

10-02-2007, 10:00 AM

Originally posted by hendrik
Isnt it that is your job to repsent to all of us?No, the only person here who even thinks in those terms is you. Your youtube performance is nice if you like gibberish. There are no examples of any of the things you like to talk at length about and no execution of any applicable functions in the video either. We know you like to talk what we are learning now it that you don't practice wing chun according to Rene and you can't apply the things you talk about according Terence.

We also know that when it was time for you to "represent" and test your qi your snake slides and water palm short stances what did we see. We saw you get put on your @ss in 3 moves by the Weng Chun GM. hendrik you had the chance to "represent" YKWC and you convinced no one that Yik Kam wing chun is any different any older or any more effective than any other wing chun. You had your chance to "represent" and use yik kam wing chun against chi sim weng chun and you couldn't make it work no qi no stance no snake no crane nothing.

hendrik you don't practice wing chun but you want others to believe or follow your theory through your post and videos when you yourself have presented evidence to the contrary of you and your wing chun containing any more knowledge or ability than anyone else on this forum. The only thing you have proven to date is your ability to post twice as often as others as if that were evidence that your theory has some weight to it.
http://www.hfy108.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=5

Hendrik

10-02-2007, 11:30 AM

No, the only person here who even thinks in those terms is you. Your youtube performance is nice if you like gibberish. There are no examples of any of the things you like to talk at length about and no execution of any applicable functions in the video either. We know you like to talk what we are learning now it that you don't practice wing chun according to Rene and you can't apply the things you talk about according Terence.

We also know that when it was time for you to "represent" and test your qi your snake slides and water palm short stances what did we see. We saw you get put on your @ss in 3 moves by the Weng Chun GM. hendrik you had the chance to "represent" YKWC and you convinced no one that Yik Kam wing chun is any different any older or any more effective than any other wing chun. You had your chance to "represent" and use yik kam wing chun against chi sim weng chun and you couldn't make it work no qi no stance no snake no crane nothing.

hendrik you don't practice wing chun but you want others to believe or follow your theory through your post and videos when you yourself have presented evidence to the contrary of you and your wing chun containing any more knowledge or ability than anyone else on this forum. The only thing you have proven to date is your ability to post twice as often as others as if that were evidence that your theory has some weight to it.
http://www.hfy108.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=5

Thanks for sharing your view. I totally accept , approve your view and posting the way you are with love.

However, it is off topic. right?