His-Story and Attachment

[chusauli]

The recent exchange with some of the HFY group caused me to think about some things I have encountered in the martial arts all of my life. That is the faith of one's history as being the one and only truth and that it invalidates all other truths. Here, I want to speak a bit about some of the myths, legends, lore, and his-story (which may or may not conform to actual events in history). Often the attachment to the his-story because of loyalty, love, discipleship, familial relationship and the like, cause blindness, rage, anger, stupidity and a desire to protect that "truth" no matter what. If we can have a centered mind (perhaps a too lofty goal of WCK?), perhaps we can see through our attachments here.

The Chinese are pack rats. They never throw anything away. When Yin Yang becomes in vogue, it does not invalidate the 5 elements. If 5 elements fits, it does not mean we have to throw away Ba Gua...what this means is that although we have a linear progression, in the NOW, we also have evolutionary forces that lend ourselves to to picking and choosing to the situation, and pull out what fits in the moment. The recent posts about signatures in WCK shows that if we look one way, we can explain why and how logically, something might occur. But all this is just one filter. And alternative situations may exist or fit. If you want to be a historian, you have to understand how things are created and the mindset of Chinese as a race of thought.

I do not believe all accounts of martial arts history. In the past, many civilian martial artists might be good, but lousy at military affairs. Or they might have been poor paupers eeking out a living doing street performances and selling Dit Da Jow. Many of them have very poor education, even to the point of being illiterate, and only able to speak their native village dialect. In general, these were not intelligensia, and all they had were local folk lore, and legends passed down from their teacher.

I will present some conflicting stories and urge the reader not to react, but simply look at them for what they are worth, and see.

1) When I was a young man in NYC, I met a group called Wu Mei Pai. Now my story here is not to arouse an attack on their group, but illustrate how we can look at things critically. Wu Mei or Ng Mui is the legendary nun who taught Yim Wing Chun in the myths (er, for some of you history). When I looked at the system, it only barely had some resemblance to WCK. His forms were big and dynamic, with swings and short bridges, and unusual steps. Actually the system had over a dozen forms, and not one of them looked like Siu Nim Tao, Chum Kiu, or Biu Jee. I met the Sifu, and he had heard the stories and said that WCK was a crash course self defense created by Ng Mui/Wu Mei, and that it looked different because it was only partial Wu Mei.

So in essence, I thought, "WCK was to them a half a$$ed crash course mail order system with only part of this complete system? Why I oughtta...!"

Actually, I liked the sifu, he was charming and generous and open, and to this day I feel very warm to him. Did his story invalidate my practice? No. Did he make me feel small? No. Did I believe what he said? No. But do I believe he said things because he believed it? Yes.

And its okay.

Now, what is the relevance to all of us? In the eyes of Wu Mei guy, we're doing a partial offshoot of Wu Mei. Do you feel small? Do you want to prove he is wrong? Do you accept that story? Does this invalidate your practice? Do you want to protect your lineage now?

I want to hear some feedback, and then I'll continue...

[duende]

The recent exchange with some of the HFY group caused me to think about some things I have encountered in the martial arts all of my life. That is the faith of one's history as being the one and only truth and that it invalidates all other truths. Here, I want to speak a bit about some of the myths, legends, lore, and his-story (which may or may not conform to actual events in history). Often the attachment to the his-story because of loyalty, love, discipleship, familial relationship and the like, cause blindness, rage, anger, stupidity and a desire to protect that "truth" no matter what. If we can have a centered mind (perhaps a too lofty goal of WCK?), perhaps we can see through our attachments here.


Let me say for the record. HFY is not trying to invalidate anyone else's history. Merely share our own. On the contrary, the flame fest on the thread in question was over an agenda to not only invalidate our history, but slander it.






The Chinese are pack rats. They never throw anything away. When Yin Yang becomes in vogue, it does not invalidate the 5 elements. If 5 elements fits, it does not mean we have to throw away Ba Gua...what this means is that although we have a linear progression, in the NOW, we also have evolutionary forces that lend ourselves to to picking and choosing to the situation, and pull out what fits in the moment. The recent posts about signatures in WCK shows that if we look one way, we can explain why and how logically, something might occur. But all this is just one filter. And alternative situations may exist or fit. If you want to be a historian, you have to understand how things are created and the mindset of Chinese as a race of thought.


I see no conflict with the concepts you mention above. (ie. Ba Gua circle) They actually all work together imo.


As far as filters. Yes.. we are all filters. Thank you for acknowledging it.



I do not believe all accounts of martial arts history. In the past, many civilian martial artists might be good, but lousy at military affairs. Or they might have been poor paupers eeking out a living doing street performances and selling Dit Da Jow. Many of them have very poor education, even to the point of being illiterate, and only able to speak their native village dialect. In general, these were not intelligensia, and all they had were local folk lore, and legends passed down from their teacher.

I will present some conflicting stories and urge the reader not to react, but simply look at them for what they are worth, and see.


1) When I was a young man in NYC, I met a group called Wu Mei Pai. Now my story here is not to arouse an attack on their group, but illustrate how we can look at things critically. Wu Mei or Ng Mui is the legendary nun who taught Yim Wing Chun in the myths (er, for some of you history). When I looked at the system, it only barely had some resemblance to WCK. His forms were big and dynamic, with swings and short bridges, and unusual steps. Actually the system had over a dozen forms, and not one of them looked like Siu Nim Tao, Chum Kiu, or Biu Jee. I met the Sifu, and he had heard the stories and said that WCK was a crash course self defense created by Ng Mui/Wu Mei, and that it looked different because it was only partial Wu Mei.

So in essence, I thought, "WCK was to them a half a$$ed crash course mail order system with only part of this complete system? Why I oughtta...!"

Actually, I liked the sifu, he was charming and generous and open, and to this day I feel very warm to him. Did his story invalidate my practice? No. Did he make me feel small? No. Did I believe what he said? No. But do I believe he said things because he believed it? Yes.

And its okay.

Now, what is the relevance to all of us? In the eyes of Wu Mei guy, we're doing a partial offshoot of Wu Mei. Do you feel small? Do you want to prove he is wrong? Do you accept that story? Does this invalidate your practice? Do you want to protect your lineage now?

I want to hear some feedback, and then I'll continue...

It doesn't invalidate or prove anything. It is just a shared experience.

From my perspective, this account sounds like yet another San Sau version of WC. Nothing wrong with it. Nothing less legitimate or anything like that either.

[Ultimatewingchun]

Picking up on the "pack rats" idea, Robert, it's been my experience with the Chinese culture (and the same is true, imo, for many Jews, for many Greeks, for many Italians - and the list could go on and on)...

that their way is the only way, or "their way" is always the best way, or "their way" is the only TRUE tradition, or is the best tradition, etc.

Moy Yat, who was far more "Chinese" in this regard than William Cheung, used to openly refer to white people, from time-to-time...as children.

And of course, to him, the Chinese were the adults.

One of the highest compliments I ever got from him, in fact, was a very left-handed piece of praise.

He was watching me do chi sao one day with one of the guys (who was Chinese) - and then turned to some of the other guys who were also watching and said - almost with disappointment in his voice, "This guy, he's almost Chinese."

Because I was truly going with the flow, instead of always trying to use force-against-force...one of the hardest things to convey to a student - and in his opinion, especially to non-Chinese students.

But in the larger scheme of things, what does this all mean? And what do these kinds of things mean in terms of wing chun lineages?

I used to think it meant a great deal, as I was part of William Cheung’s big organization, and for many years I played a big role in his NYC operation.

He was the best, TWC was the best, etc.

And I still believe that TWC has more answers to fighting than any other wing chun system I’ve ever seen.

But there’s a MUCH BIGGER PICTURE: no matter how good I believe TWC is – all by itself, it’s not enough either. There are still many MORE answers that need to be had, imo, if I want to maximize my potential as a fighter, and as an instructor of martial arts.

So I do a lot of crosstraining now.

And I’ve done a re-examination of what I learned from Moy Yat – and now integrate a lot of it into the TWC…or is it integrating TWC into the Ving Tsun I learned from Moy Yat?

It doesn’t matter. All that matters is that what you do WORKS. Whether it comes from a “real” system, a “fake” system, a Shaolin system, a non-Shaolin system, or from the North Pole.

[TenTigers]

doesn't matter where it comes from. At the end of the day, it's your Gung-Fu.
Your personal journey, your experience,your evolution.

[Tensei85]

Picking up on the "pack rats" idea, Robert, it's been my experience with the Chinese culture (and the same is true, imo, for many Jews, for many Greeks, for many Italians - and the list could go on and on)...

that their way is the only way, or "their way" is always the best way, or "their way" is the only TRUE tradition, or is the best tradition, etc.

Moy Yat, who was far more "Chinese" in this regard than William Cheung, used to openly refer to white people, from time-to-time...as children.

And of course, to him, the Chinese were the adults.

One of the highest compliments I ever got from him, in fact, was a very left-handed piece of praise.

He was watching me do chi sao one day with one of the guys (who was Chinese) - and then turned to some of the other guys who were also watching and said - almost with disappointment in his voice, "This guy, he's almost Chinese."

Because I was truly going with the flow, instead of always trying to use force-against-force...one of the hardest things to convey to a student - and in his opinion, especially to non-Chinese students.

But in the larger scheme of things, what does this all mean? And what do these kinds of things mean in terms of wing chun lineages?

I used to think it meant a great deal, as I was part of William Cheung’s big organization, and for many years I played a big role in his NYC operation.

He was the best, TWC was the best, etc.

And I still believe that TWC has more answers to fighting than any other wing chun system I’ve ever seen.

But there’s a MUCH BIGGER PICTURE: no matter how good I believe TWC is – all by itself, it’s not enough either. There are still many MORE answers that need to be had, imo, if I want to maximize my potential as a fighter, and as an instructor of martial arts.

So I do a lot of crosstraining now.

And I’ve done a re-examination of what I learned from Moy Yat – and now integrate a lot of it into the TWC…or is it integrating TWC into the Ving Tsun I learned from Moy Yat?

It doesn’t matter. All that matters is that what you do WORKS. Whether it comes from a “real” system, a “fake” system, a Shaolin system, a non-Shaolin system, or from the North Pole.


Great post! I agree 100%.

[Wayfaring]

History and attachment. What I believe about this is most Eastern martial arts have been trained as family based arts for centuries. The whole culture surrounding bai si or discipleship as a familial type adoption of sorts shows this culture. This in essense encapsulates the human nature of any type of endeavor- people grow close to those they work closely with, train with, fight with, etc. The whole teacher / student relationship is familial in nature.

Each family of marital arts has different folklore, stories, lineages, and techniques. The northern longfist and southern longfist have different teachers, originaters, etc. WCK is no different. Conflict comes in when comparing different stories, lineages, folklore, etc.

I have no trouble viewing WCK as different family types of arts. William Cheung and TWC is one family - with different lineages, approaches origins. Likewise the Moy Yat branch of Yip Man WCK. As is the WSL branch. And the HFY branch as Garrett Gee's familial lineage of WCK. Each has different stories of origin, folklore, training methods, names, etc.

This is no different than Brazilian Jiu Jitsu. Gracie family has a lineage, Machados do, every school that has competitors does, such as the Lloyd Irvin BJJ group.

Yet people all get obsessed in WCK with who is oldest, best, etc. That is irrelevant. Your family will develop unique skillsets becuase of who trains there. As for the rest of it, let it go.

[Wayfaring]

One other thing on this topic. The importance of attachment to ancestors needs to be considered with respect to studying Eastern martial arts. Traditionally there is a strong sense of connection to the past and future that is there. This is true with native eastern thinkers as well as those who have adopted this type of thinking.

While in a predominantly Western thinking society people may not hold these things as much in value as others, it needs to be obviated and acknowledged.

What happens when two people with a strong sense of connection to their ancestors meet? And they have differing legends, artifacts, historical accounts? Each feels the need to validate their connection. In doing so they inadvertently invalidate the other's connection. And as that connection is a strong part of identity, this produces heated results, bickering over "proving" historical accounts, accusing people of making things up, etc.

"Proving" lineage is hard. I supposedly have ancestors in America pre-dating the Civil War. What proof do I have? Virtually none. A family tree someone filled in with names and dates. Prior to 1900 records aren't complete in most cities west of the Mississippi river.

So "attachment" to history and lineage is understandable when taking into account these things. What is "real" is different and can get into the ridiculous. And the "soft" nature of the stories, documents, proofs to all of this just get people up in arms and lead to non-productive interaction.

That's why I think considering WCK w/r to a family lineage is probably the best approach.

.02 out.

[chusauli]

Many thanks for your posts!

Alex, many thanks! Really, its nothing if someone from another system says we are "incomplete". BTW, I fail to see how Wu Mei/Ng Mui is a San Sau version of WCK? Perhaps you have a different meaning?

Victor, yes, sometimes Cantonese ethnocentricity can get out of hand! Even myself, being a "Northern Chinese", often heard similar BS! Yes, crosstraining is what all martial artists should do - we learn what we can and then meet others to help us.

Rik, yes, you either own your martial art, or are learning/perfecting it.

Wayfaring, its healthy to listen to other families, but simply understand that is their perspective...attachment is a disease. We should listen neutrally.

[duende]

Many thanks for your posts!

Alex, many thanks! Really, its nothing if someone from another system says we are "incomplete". BTW, I fail to see how Wu Mei/Ng Mui is a San Sau version of WCK? Perhaps you have a different meaning?



Robert,

Yes, San Sau can have many different meanings. In this case, I was only referring to a lack of actual SNT/CK/BG forms. So I did not mean "incomplete", but rather was simply paraphrasing the "crash course" reference in your post.

[sandman]

My Si-sook recently talked to us about the lineage, translating Sigung Moy Yat's Kuen Kuit, character by character.

I later asked him, "Do you really believe this story is true?"

And he replied, "It doesn't matter whether it's true or not, what matters is that we tell it this way. The Chinese don't use history to remember dates and facts, they use history to convey lessons. In fact, they will change facts and dates to be more auspicious, or more meaningful. So what's important is that we teach that our art was invented by a woman, and taught to another woman."

This was an eye opener for me. From then on, I approached my training with the question: "could a woman do what I am doing and be successful?" If not, then am I really doing right?

[chusauli]

Robert,

Yes, San Sau can have many different meanings. In this case, I was only referring to a lack of actual SNT/CK/BG forms. So I did not mean "incomplete", but rather was simply paraphrasing the "crash course" reference in your post.

San Sau in the traditional sense refers to "loose or separate hands", usually movements taken out of a form, or applications, or even "free hand application" of a system.

Are you saying WCK is a San Sau version of Wu Mei/Ng Mui?

[chusauli]

My Si-sook recently talked to us about the lineage, translating Sigung Moy Yat's Kuen Kuit, character by character.

I later asked him, "Do you really believe this story is true?"

And he replied, "It doesn't matter whether it's true or not, what matters is that we tell it this way. The Chinese don't use history to remember dates and facts, they use history to convey lessons. In fact, they will change facts and dates to be more auspicious, or more meaningful. So what's important is that we teach that our art was invented by a woman, and taught to another woman."

This was an eye opener for me. From then on, I approached my training with the question: "could a woman do what I am doing and be successful?" If not, then am I really doing right?


Many people use the myth of Yim Wing Chun to justify the soft, feminine aspects.

And some other martial artists have used, "Yes, of course WCK is created by a woman! Look at how petty they are! They're just like women who are scorned! They bring up the past over and over again, and fight and bicker like women!!"

One of the MA magazines editors said that "Yim Wing Chun is rolling in her grave because she sees how men screwed up the system!"

LOL! Personally, I do not believe the female myth, nor do I believe all women bicker and bring up a distorted past. It was a very chauvanistic statement!

[duende]

San Sau in the traditional sense refers to "loose or separate hands", usually movements taken out of a form, or applications, or even "free hand application" of a system.

Are you saying WCK is a San Sau version of Wu Mei/Ng Mui?

No. Let me be more clear. Been on the go... so my posts have had to be real short.

I was only referring to how hypothetically, if I saw something that didn't have SNT/CK/BG, but I still thought there was a some relationship to WCK, that then MY initial impression would be that it was possibly a San Sau version of WCK (meaning simply no formal SNT/CK/BG not incomplete).

Contrary to what your Wu Mei Pai person said about his history.

[Phil Redmond]

. . . . .When I was a young man in NYC, I met a group called Wu Mei Pai. Now my story here is not to arouse an attack on their group, but illustrate how we can look at things critically. Wu Mei or Ng Mui is the legendary nun who taught Yim Wing Chun in the myths (er, for some of you history). . . . .
When I studied another "version" of WC at the Five Tigers school on Duane St. in NY there was a Wu Mei Sifu teaching there.
I later met Sifu Ken Lo http://www.wumei.com/sifu/index.htm
in my Cantonese class at CCNY. He also told me that WC came from Wu Mei. According to his website Ken is the founding Director of the Wu Mei Kung Fu Association and is the highest authority of Wu Mei Kung Fu worldwide. Was the Wu Mei group you met from 5 Tigers or Ken Lo's group. Just curious.

[sandman]

LOL! Personally, I do not believe the female myth, nor do I believe all women bicker and bring up a distorted past. It was a very chauvanistic statement!

I don't believe the myth either (in fact I recommend your book to my sidai whenever they ask about all the different versions of our history, and prefer your conclusions).

But true or not, I think somewhere in the past, at least one of our ancestors thought it was important to teach us that a nun founded the system rather than a monk, and that a it was named after a woman.

There may be someone bigger and stronger than us, that's what the story teaches us. If you encountered an opponent who was a good foot or more taller than you, and 100 pounds heavier, (considering my stature, that's a very real possibility) could your kung fu handle that? I believe that's the question that the story is meant to put in our head.

It's very hard for students to "fight like a woman". Even the female students get on the floor and want to "fight like a man".

[t_niehoff]

I don't believe the myth either (in fact I recommend your book to my sidai whenever they ask about all the different versions of our history, and prefer your conclusions).

But true or not, I think somewhere in the past, at least one of our ancestors thought it was important to teach us that a nun founded the system rather than a monk, and that a it was named after a woman.

There may be someone bigger and stronger than us, that's what the story teaches us. If you encountered an opponent who was a good foot or more taller than you, and 100 pounds heavier, (considering my stature, that's a very real possibility) could your kung fu handle that? I believe that's the question that the story is meant to put in our head.

It's very hard for students to "fight like a woman". Even the female students get on the floor and want to "fight like a man".

Yes, you're right. I too think many of these stories are allegories (and not literally true).

[sandman]

Now, what is the relevance to all of us? In the eyes of Wu Mei guy, we're doing a partial offshoot of Wu Mei. Do you feel small? Do you want to prove he is wrong? Do you accept that story? Does this invalidate your practice? Do you want to protect your lineage now?


I should say that my point above was really to answer these questions. The discussions of whether a particular history is true or not doesn't affect my life. To each their own. I'm not really trying to convince anyone that my version is right, just trying to share what I've learned from it.

[chusauli]

I don't believe the myth either (in fact I recommend your book to my sidai whenever they ask about all the different versions of our history, and prefer your conclusions).

But true or not, I think somewhere in the past, at least one of our ancestors thought it was important to teach us that a nun founded the system rather than a monk, and that a it was named after a woman.

There may be someone bigger and stronger than us, that's what the story teaches us. If you encountered an opponent who was a good foot or more taller than you, and 100 pounds heavier, (considering my stature, that's a very real possibility) could your kung fu handle that? I believe that's the question that the story is meant to put in our head.

It's very hard for students to "fight like a woman". Even the female students get on the floor and want to "fight like a man".


Many thanks!

Yes, agree! A small man or a woman could defend herself. And the good thing is that we can use that image to empower us.

[chusauli]

I should say that my point above was really to answer these questions. The discussions of whether a particular history is true or not doesn't affect my life. To each their own. I'm not really trying to convince anyone that my version is right, just trying to share what I've learned from it.

Absolutely! An important lesson to learn!

There are too many conflicting stories and we should not identify with them personally, merely take out those elements of the story which can be useful.

You also show what a rational person does, as opposed to what someone who's identity is wrapped up in their "truth".

Thank you for your contribution!

[sihing]

You also show what a rational person does, as opposed to what someone who's identity is wrapped up in their "truth".

Thank you for your contribution!

I like this last part. When people identify with something, they will defend it like it is something personal. Your lineage, history, bla bla bla is not personal. Your skills and your ability to use what you are training in is what is personal. And none of that can be proven by what you write about here on a internet forum. Meet ups are the only way to express that.

For me, I love what I am training in. Is it the best out there? Yes, no, maybe so, but regardless it is what is good for me at this moment, and the need to compare it with other methods is not there.

What I see here on this forum is allot of identification and attachment. Once these things are present, one is not expressing themselves from a reality viewpoint.

James

[chusauli]

Continuing....

When I moved to Los Angeles in 1988, I met a Vietnamese Chinese monk at a martial arts performance. He sat next to me and asked if I learned martial arts. I told him yes, "WCK.."

He was delighted, as he was also learned in WCK. "Our lineage came from China, from a Yuen Chai Wan..."

I recognized the lineage, it was Yuen Kay Shan's brother who went to Cambodia and later Vietnam, teaching the local Wah Kiu (Overseas Chinese) there.

He asked me if I learned the Gim set?

"Gim? What Gim?"

Then he asked if I learned the Ng Ying Hei Gung (Five Animal Qigong set)?

I told him that in our lineage does not have such a thing. I explained we have Siu Nim Tao, Chum Kiu and Biu Jee. He stopped to correct me, "Siu Lien Tao?" No, our first set was "Siu Nim Tao", but I clarified that "Siu Lien Tao was the old name..."

The monk was puzzled, and asked me the origins of my WCK. I told him about grandmaster Yip Man and his branch in HK. He did not know of Yip Man, as he was from Vietnam.

Finally, he asked me, "Are you sure you learned WCK?!"

I smiled, and clasped my hands in the the Buddhist salutation and said "Amitoufo!", the performance was beginning...and thus ended our conversation...

------------------------------------------------
So, I ask you, should I have thrashed the monk? Should I have insisted mine was better without the 5 animal qi gong? That we didn't learn any stupid gim set? And that he should get an ass kicking because my lineage didn't have any of his items? What would you have done? :)

[sihing]

Continuing....

------------------------------------------------
So, I ask you, should I have thrashed the monk? Should I have insisted mine was better without the 5 animal qi gong? That we didn't learn any stupid gim set? And that he should get an ass kicking because my lineage didn't have any of his items? What would you have done? :)

I believe you did the right thing Robert. When you try to convince someone of something, you are basically saying "Your wrong, I am right". This type of thinking is of the ego, which stems from the need to be superior or different/seperate from everyone else. The scenerio you described, I've had the same as well. Basically I keep my mouth shut and let them do the talking, eventually the person's true knowledge or skills will be revealed as they continue to express themselves. If they say things that are contrary to what I beleive I still keep my mouth shut, only when there is some common ground do I start to express my feelings about something. Agruments get us know where, as can be demonstrated by 99% of the posts on this forum.

James

[t_niehoff]

I believe you did the right thing Robert. When you try to convince someone of something, you are basically saying "Your wrong, I am right". This type of thinking is of the ego, which stems from the need to be superior or different/seperate from everyone else.


Critical discussions will involve a dialogue where the participants are interested in what is true or not. Just because one or more person believe that their views are correct doesn't mean they are being egocentric or that by engaging in discussions they are ego-driven. Critical discussion involve examing evidence, critiquing reasoning, etc. to test everyone's views -- including your own. It's like competing in a sport -- it is the competition that forces you to do your best and thereby increases your performance levels but it also shows you where you are lacking, weak, etc. Through critical discussion, you can learn, refine, rethink, etc.

What Robert is getting at IMO is that when we are "attached" (and I don't particularly care for the buddhist nomenclature) to a dogma or person or whatever, then we stop ourselves from engaging in critical discussion, i.e., we stop ourselves from learning, refining, rethinking, etc.

[Hendrik]

Those who is rich and can effort a private Jet hold on or Attach to thier Jet.

and those attach to their Sport cars.

and those attach to thier bank account.

and those attach to thier family

and those attach to thier rigtheousness.

and those attach to thier fame...

and those attach to thier... who knows what?


all are just trying to keep the EGO to continous on Alive.



There is no an absolute set of Time, Space, energy but EGO makes it as we likes it.

Dont believe me? Think something you hate. Think Something you love. are the Time, space, energy the same? hahaha. Everything Changes based on your ego likes it or hate it.

Thus, the Buddhist doesnt talk about Time, Space, energy because Zen do away the EGO and the rest fall into the right place.

So, what History? What His-story? just illusion and the alabi your ego use to keep it alive.

Let go the Ego and let it die, then, what is the problem? none!
everything is perfectly in peace. but who is going to do it to drop the EGO?



hahaha . Well, keep discuss and argue that is how we keep our ego alive. and we all enjoy it isnt it?

[sihing]

Critical discussions will involve a dialogue where the participants are interested in what is true or not. Just because one or more person believe that their views are correct doesn't mean they are being egocentric or that by engaging in discussions they are ego-driven. Critical discussion involve examing evidence, critiquing reasoning, etc. to test everyone's views -- including your own. It's like competing in a sport -- it is the competition that forces you to do your best and thereby increases your performance levels but it also shows you where you are lacking, weak, etc. Through critical discussion, you can learn, refine, rethink, etc.

What Robert is getting at IMO is that when we are "attached" (and I don't particularly care for the buddhist nomenclature) to a dogma or person or whatever, then we stop ourselves from engaging in critical discussion, i.e., we stop ourselves from learning, refining, rethinking, etc.

Terence,

It's not about people stating their beliefs and then other's disagreeing with it. This is going to happen whenever discussions are present, it's a given. It's when people become so attached to what they are saying that it feels personal too them, this can be seen in how people react when others bring forth differing opinions or idea/viewpoints. Some of your posts make me feel that you are attached to what you say, simply for the fact that you constantly repeat yourself, and do so with emotion attached to it. For me there are plenty of things that you and I agree on (that is why I don't have you on ignore, but appreciate the things you have to say), but in some instances you seem to argue for the sake of arguement. I've seen you put down people and label them (sort of like an emotional outburst, labelling people or calling them names) as this or that, when they are essentially saying the samething that you are. To me that represents someone that may be attached to what they believe.

I agree, that when people are attached to this or that, and become identified with it, they fail to see other's POV, and become closed minded. This is a natural, I've gone thru this myself and hopefully have learned to recognize the signs when and if it happens upon me again. Experiences are never good or bad, they just are. Mistakes, or negative experiences in life can teach us more than are victories, if you our aware enough to learn from them.

James

[Wayfaring]

So I'm not a Buddhist, but I think there's a Buddhist concept we're dancing around in this thread, and that is that all suffering comes from attachment. To free one's self from suffering one has to free themselves from attachment.

Do I have that right, you Buddhist dudes?

[chusauli]

LOL! Buddhist dudes!

Yeah, you got it! LOL!

[t_niehoff]

What I find is that the great majority of people are not accustomed to and don't like having their views challenged or criticized. When that happens, they get defensive, emotional, and withdraw. Criticism and being challenged is standard operating procedure in some disciplines, like law, philosophy, science, etc. and people in those areas, like me, get very used to it. But I sometimes forget that most people aren't used to it and don't like it. Then when we take those people and put them in the TMAs, which fosters a don't-question-the-authority mindset, it only exacerbates their feelings about having their views challenged.

[chusauli]

Yes, Terence, that is a big problem. If people can maintain an open, neutral, "higher" level of mind to listen, without bringing in emotional baggage, ego, "old" patterns, etc. a lot could be more constructive and actually help.

All criticism has a bit of truth in it, but the emotion is overbearing and gets people to react defensively or turn off to it.

As I get older, and now being a parent, I find I have to be a better example, and have to be more sensitive using proper language. It takes more brainpower to choose more appropriate words, and also, if discussing on a message board, we do not know the character of the person getting the message, so perhaps it is better that we conduct our words more carefully.

Many people who aren't aware of your straightforward style and can have a problem with it. TMA, does put things like "courtesy" and "respect" first, probably with the wisdom that if not, things will get out of hand.

Law, science, philosophy, history, politics, and medicine all do use Socratic methods to arrive at truth. Arguments can be a norm, and people in those fields take it with a grain of salt. But others outside that field and worldview can get upset and emotional.

[sihing]

What I find is that the great majority of people are not accustomed to and don't like having their views challenged or criticized. When that happens, they get defensive, emotional, and withdraw. Criticism and being challenged is standard operating procedure in some disciplines, like law, philosophy, science, etc. and people in those areas, like me, get very used to it. But I sometimes forget that most people aren't used to it and don't like it. Then when we take those people and put them in the TMAs, which fosters a don't-question-the-authority mindset, it only exacerbates their feelings about having their views challenged.

Good post:)

I agree that most people are not comfortable hearing someone challenge their view points. This is the awareness telling you that you are attached or identified with whatever the viewpoint is, but most, instead of reflecting upon that feeling, attack the attacker with mindless arguements and acusations, it's so prevelant here that I have choosen not to post very much. I've seen it many times T where you have challenged someone's views, only for them to come back with personal attacks and name calling. Right there is the proof of their attachment and identification. If you know something as truth for yourself, nothing outside of yourself can effect that truth. The problem is most of us never go that far to find out what is truth for ourselves.

I've actually thought at times that you may be using this forum as a way to fine tune your agrumentative abilities for your profession. I will say that your have very strong forum fu;)


James

[Hendrik]

If people can maintain an open, neutral, "higher" level of mind to listen, without bringing in emotional baggage, ego, "old" patterns, etc. a lot could be more constructive and actually help.





RC,

To be real honest, the above cant be done.
This is because NONE of us can let go our identity.

With an Identity, disregards how one THINK one is already trap in one's mind set which based on EGO.

Until the Identity can be let go, people are just act OBJECTIVE in the surface, bottom there, Still EGO has its own agenda.

[Hendrik]

Speaking on attach to the His-story.

I could be the number one guy who attach to the history in some one's view. hahaha
Do I care? nope.




Let me share with you some history.


The CLF trained the Taiping's army.

So, in CLF there is a set name Peng (settle ) kuen and there is another set named Cheong (long) kuen. Peng in Mandarin is Ping.


So these two sets implied Tai Ping (Ping for peng kuen) kingdom long (Cheong for Cheong Kuen) peaceful for 10000 years.




In WCK, there is a similar implication act in the Yik Kam WCK lineage's SLT and 6.5 Pole set.

at the end of the SLT set, there is a salutation said " Wing Elbow Sword finger present to Hero"

the last half point of the 6.5 pole set said " Half point of Central spear settle the Taiping."


So, with SLT set mention Hero Or Ying Hung or the implication of Dei De Hui and the 6.5 pole mention Taiping or the implication of Taiping Kingdom.

Thus, the SLT and 6.5 Pole of Yik kam are implied the invovement with the Co operation of the Tien Die Hui + Taiping Kingdom's anti Qi uprising of the red boat opera lead by Lee man-mau 1850's.




Another data point for WCK, operation ID, in 1850s.


Big deal? nope if one has it and know it.
attachement? dont have to.

[Wayfaring]

RC,

To be real honest, the above cant be done.
This is because NONE of us can let go our identity.

With an Identity, disregards how one THINK one is already trap in one's mind set which based on EGO.

Until the Identity can be let go, people are just act OBJECTIVE in the surface, bottom there, Still EGO has its own agenda.

Yeah, well, as true as this may be perhaps the idea for all of us is that we can all chillaxe a little bit and not take ourselves so seriously.

That's probably a good idea.

[Hendrik]

Yeah, well, as true as this may be perhaps the idea for all of us is that we can all chillaxe a little bit and not take ourselves so seriously.

That's probably a good idea.



Unless one is an enlighten being who has attain non attachement

as soon as you will wake up when some one called your name when you are a sleep. You are taking an identity even when you are a sleep, or beyond your thinking mind. So, tough luck for Human being to speak about non attachement and non self-rigtheousness.

[chusauli]

Don't worry about being a bodhisattva.

Just worry about being open minded and not threatened when you hear derogatory nonsense:

Continuing...

1982 New York, meeting with a mainland China WCK master (not my Yuen Kay Shan sifu, Kwan Jong Yuen):

"Yip Man had to learn from YKS. YKS taught him the pole and Chi Sao and other sets. Yip Man didn't learn from Chan Wah Shun because Chan died a few months after Yip became a disciple. Yip couldn't fight, he used his mind to intimidate his opponents. One time, he had a pistol in his trousers when he was a constable, and then beat up the prisoner. The psychological effect of having a gun in his pants scared the hell out of his opponents. He was very clever!"

I merely shook my head as I heard his tales. He continued:

"If you learn from me, I can teach you both the Yip Man and YKS forms...I know them both. I can teach you the knives. You're Chinese, I won't teach Gwai Lo like I teach you. All I want is $600 per set..."

I queried, "What is the difference between the 2 sets of knives?"

"Yip Man is Baat Jaam Dao - YKS is Yee Ji Cern Dao. They're not the same."

I was quiet, just mulling things over. Wanting to say more, the master said, "I have a student who can punch 10 times in a second!"

"10 times in a second? How hard can he punch?" I asked.

His answer, "Well, he can't punch that hard..."

With that, the master and I departed. I heard his sales pitch and the money he wanted, and I wasn't impressed... more disgusted was like it. In the future, I would meet dozens more like him...

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

Should I have gotten upset? Were his words a threat to me? Should I have dropped to my knees immediately to learn how to punch 10 weak punches a second?

My Si Hing encouraged me, "You should have learned from him - why not? Everything you learn is yours...its not what you learn, its what you can do with it!"

My Si Hing had a good point...

[TenTigers]

You'll like this one: A guy tried to tell me that WCK was invented for women to defend themselves against men- the elbows in position was to protect the breasts, and the yjkym was to protect the groin, and because women wore dresses and tight fitting clothes. (you don't want to see what that section in SNT with the rear palm pushes meant...)So it was designed as an anti-date rape style.
I just shrugged my shoulders and said, "Mmmm'k...so , Loong Ying, Bak Mei, SPM, etc were also for prom night?"

[TenTigers]

Do you know of a man named Yee (pronounced Yue as in fish) from Guangzhao, who does Sum Nung/YKS style? He also teaches members of the police dept. there. Nice guy, doesn't speak much English, spends his summers in Staten Island.

[lkfmdc]

I found this such an interesting thread I sort of dragged it onto the main forum, if you want to chat over there

[chusauli]

Thank you David.

Rik, Yes, I heard the date rape story and the crash course story before! LOL! Don't know the Yee guy you are talking about. A few YKS people moved to NYC after I moved to Los Angeles. There is Allan Fong in Staten Island...a former WT guy.

BTW, all the Hakka/Dong Kong/Dong Jiang systems look like WCK - Bak Mei, Lung Ying, SPM. Lung Ying is allegedly created by Ng Mui. How could Ng Mui create 3 complete systems? I always wondered. Later, I felt that Ng Mui is just a myth. So why would systems be named after a mythical person?

So, the "history" of an art are a bunch of "His-stories" going about. Of course, a lot of people fall for this hook, line and sinker and really treat the story as if true. They'd do anything to protect that image. Others have a blend of history and fictional lore, similar to the recent Yip Man movie, for instance. Yip Man certainly didn't beat up ten Japanese soldiers in a match or have a death duel with a Japanese colonel...

Take Hung Ga Kuen for example. The legend of Wong Fei Hung has gotten so far off track from the real Wong Fei Hung, (and now, WCK's Leung Jan's story is not that far off!) and many Hung Ga people think they are the living embodiment of Wong Fei Hung. It is a good example, Wong was allegedly a healer and martial artist, and showed good Mo Duk - if only martial artists could really emulate him...

Legends and stories give us an archetype...

[Ultimatewingchun]

It's what you can DO...

not the history or the his-story behind it.

Can you fight with it, for example?

Everything else is ego-pandering. One way or the other. Either by those trying to set up (make claims) about the historical lineage of "their" wing chun - or by those with some sort of vested (ego) interest in trying to tear down other peoples' lineage stories (histories/his-stories).

Two sides of one coin. I say, throw the coin into a fountain and move on.

Can you fight with your wing chun? That's what matters. Can you pass it on as an instructor? That's what matters. Can you act like a good ambassador for wing chun (ie.- be respectful to others)? That's what matters.

Can you stop "making believe" that you're really doing these things, when instead all you're really doing is looking for some "edge" on the other guy?

That's what matters, Robert.

[chusauli]

Victor,

In today's day and age, practicality and application are stressed. We live in a very pragmatic world.

Thanks for your perspective. I believe many have that perspective these days.

That's why discussion of internal, forms, art, qi, mechanics, techniques and weapons, etc. get downplayed a lot. Even Chinese will use Gong Sao to settle disputes.

[Ultimatewingchun]

"We live in a very pragmatic world...I believe many have that perspective these days...That's why discussion of internal, forms, art, qi, mechanics, techniques and weapons, etc. get downplayed a lot." (Robert Chu)


***TRUE. But there are also other reasons why some people want to downplay real discussions of things like internal training, forms, chi, mechanics, technique, etc.

They have only just touched the surface of these things, so they would rather turn the channel (and the subject) elsewhere.

And worse yet, some of these very same people then take the position that such things either don't exist, or are totally irrelevant.

And then there are others who know better, but for political (ego) reasons - prefer to dance all around the subject (ie.- not only defending the true existence and relevance of these subjects - but also, pointing out the folly of those who attack these subjects).

[Hardwork108]

BTW, all the Hakka/Dong Kong/Dong Jiang systems look like WCK - Bak Mei, Lung Ying, SPM. Lung Ying is allegedly created by Ng Mui.
From the little I know I have gathered that there are fundemental differences between Wing Chun and for example SPM and by extension Bak Mei as the latter styles emphasis a lot of Nei Gung (the specifics of which they do not teach just anyone or even publicise) whereas to my knowledge this type of training is not a generally regarded as a Wing Chun staple.


How could Ng Mui create 3 complete systems? I always wondered. Later, I felt that Ng Mui is just a myth. So why would systems be named after a mythical person?
I have heard the hypothesis that there were two Ng Muis who lived in different time periods. However, her/their existance can still be a myth.


So, the "history" of an art are a bunch of "His-stories" going about. Of course, a lot of people fall for this hook, line and sinker and really treat the story as if true. They'd do anything to protect that image. Others have a blend of history and fictional lore, similar to the recent Yip Man movie, for instance.

I agree very much.


Yip Man certainly didn't beat up ten Japanese soldiers in a match or have a death duel with a Japanese colonel...
Is it known wether he ever fought a Japanese Karate-ka?


Take Hung Ga Kuen for example. The legend of Wong Fei Hung has gotten so far off track from the real Wong Fei Hung, (and now, WCK's Leung Jan's story is not that far off!) and many Hung Ga people think they are the living embodiment of Wong Fei Hung. It is a good example, Wong was allegedly a healer and martial artist, and showed good Mo Duk - if only martial artists could really emulate him...
There are those here (at least half a dozen) in the forum who also refer to Mo Duk as fantasy directly, as well as indirectly through their slanderous and dishonest behavior.


Legends and stories give us an archetype...
I suppose they have their benefits at end of the day but as you implied people should recognize them or at least the possibility of them as being what they are.

[Hendrik]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93ANwf1cgls&feature=related

[sihingmike]

As we know you have 2 types of WCK. Traditional and Modrate. The Moderate is what he was talking about. It is the quick short version of our art. The true form was divided in to 2 by Grand Master Yip Man. The reason behind this was their where students that needed to learn quickly to defend them self in Fohsan China at the time when the Japenese where invading and GM Yip Man taught them the moderate version. I my Grand Master was one of GM Yip Man's first students. We practice traditional Wing Chun.