Another look at Wing Chun History/Mystery [Archive]

JPinAZ

12-15-2010, 10:00 PM

Just wanted to take another look at some of WC's history (and mystery) sparked from another thread.

Originally posted on recent thread:

Cho family lineage has been posted a few times by Hendrik already. Below is the Lineage as I have be told in Singapore and Poon Yee, China:

Yim Wing Chun
Leung Bak Sao
Cheng Dan Kam (Yik Kam)
Cho Dak Sing (CDS)

Hendrik would include Cho Shun, CDS's father, but he did not learn from his father but directly from Cheng Dan Kam. But because his father also learnt from Cheng Dan Kam then as tradition dictates a son and father can not be at the same level. Therefore when including the father in a "full" family tree CDS would be a level lower so it was explained to me.

Thank you for sharing this information. While not everyone believes the Yim Wing Chun legend, it is clear that WC has been around before the time of Wong Wah Bo and then clearly before Yik Kam as listed in the tree above (even if WWB isn't listed in this tree). Curious if you've heard of Leung Lan Kwai learning from Leung Bak So who in turn taught Wong Wah Bo?
Anyway, the reason I bring up WWB is because of the big differences I see between just about everyone that comes down from his teachings and those few lines that come from from Yik Kam.

Why is it all the lines that come down from Wong Wah Bo's teachings have 3 hand forms while his juniors wing chun (Yik Kam) only has one long SLT?

It has been said on this forum that Yik Kam (or his teacher) is the creator of Wing Chun with it's single SLT form and mixture of Omei and White Crane, and that it is the 'original' WCK coming from Omei-Crane. It would also be believed that this one SLT was then later split into SNT/CK/BJ as we have today (in both WWB descendants and several non-WWB lineages).
Also, how can most all other lines that draw down from Yim Wing Chun, or even Wong Wah Bo (Yik Kam's senior) already have 3 hand forms and none (or very little) of the strong Omei and White Crane signatures seen only in YK's 1 SLT today if it is the original?? Also, if it is true that YK's 'original' 1 slt was split into 3 forms, why is it still 1 from in YK WCK today?

This tells me that the 1 long SLT was YK's invention after training some WC, along with the mixing in of the omei/crane information. and that is why it is still 1 long form today as opposed to the traditional 3 the rest of the WC community has that traces their lineage past YK. (except for Gulo's point system)

JPinAZ

12-15-2010, 10:10 PM

Also posted on another recent thread:

wong wah bo wing chun came long before yik kam slt. certainly yik kam wouldn't dare to call his mixed art as wing chun kune in front of wong wah bo and leung yee tai. it's up to yik kam to stand up for his own creation -' yik kam slt.'

both ching san and pin san are san sau wing chun, unlike snt/ck/bj. leung jan created two versions of gulo wck. (ching san and pin san), wong wah saam was a small guy and he couldn't use his gulo wck effectively against those big guys, therefore leung jan created another version of gulo pin san wck for wong wah saam.

Another good point. I give credit to YK for taking what WC he had and going out and furthering his training by learning Omei and Crane and mixing into his SLT form. And it is honorable that he called it Yik Kam's SLT and not 'WC'. This is most likely the case because of the mixed in Omei and Crane.

This is similar to what Bruce Lee did. We all know Bruce learn a few years of Wing Chun prior to creating his own art JKD. He didn't call it 'WC' because he knew it wasn't just WC (even if it's base started from there). It seems YK did the same when he created his YK SLT.

So back to my orignal thought, is it possible that YK also invented wing chun AFTER it had already been invented, but only with one long form instead of 3 and mixtures of other arts he studied? Of course not, we know this doesn't make a bit of sense. If so, where's the evidence?
We also know Yik Kam knew WWB (much his senior), and WWB already had his wing chun and 3 forms. So, the one long SLT with Omei and Crane couldn't have come first! If the 1 long SLT+Omei+WCrane was first, why do we not see that in any other line but the one coming from YK? And if the 1 form got split into 3, why is it still one from only in YK WC? Seems to me, it's the other way around. 3 got mixed into 1 with some other good arts and that's how it still is today.

(And this isn't even taking into account those lines that don't trace back thru WWB or red boats that also have the 3 traditional forms.) ;)

FongSung

12-15-2010, 10:56 PM

There are various versions of the origins of Wing Chun Kuen but no-one knows for sure as there are no written records as the legend was passed down verbally from master to student.

During the Qing Dynasty period Southern China was in turmoil and many rebellious groups hid there and concealed their true identities from the ruling Qing government. These rebellious groups where supporters of the old Ming Emperors and their descendants, and they sought to overthrow the Qing. Many of them were the survivors of the armies, trained in Shaolin Kung Ku, that were defeated by the Qing. These rebels formed Unions / Associations / Societies as a cover for there activities. One of these Associations was called Hung Fa Wei Gun. This group had a large northern element, including the Hakka people, it was these that started an Opera Troop so they could travel around the country without causing suspicion. They taught the southern people Opera and their Shaolin Kung Fu. After a time the Qing government found out about this and closed the Association down forcibly. It was many years before the people dared to start an Opera Troop again. They eventually did and called the Association “King Fa Wei Gun”. This became a centre for Opera and Martial Arts training. After a few years the King Fa Wei Gun purchased two Junks for the Opera troops to travel around the country.

It was during these times that the Wing Chun legends were staged. One such legend passed on to Ku Sifu is as follows.

During these times in the village of Portien, Fujian Provence there was an old man highly skilled in Shaolin Kung Fu who owned a Tau Fu shop. He had been taught in his younger days by Miu Shun, one of the Five Shaolin Elders. He had an only teenage daughter who was both beautiful and intelligent. His name was Yim Say and his daughter was Yim Wing Chun. Yim Say dotted on his daughter and had taught her all he could of his Kung Fu by the time she was a teenager.

Other than the main Shaolin temple in the mountains of Fujian there was another smaller temple called “Fat Sui Lam Sim Ying” and was occupied by Nun’s and Governed by Ng Mui. Ng Mui was also one of the Five Kung Fu elders from the main Shaolin temple was very much respected by all. Yim Yong Chun’s father and the Abbott Ng Mui were very familiar and knew each other well. He would take Yim Yong Chun to meet Ng Mui, his Sitai, on his visits to the temple. Ng Mui loved Yim Yong Chun very much and saw that she was very intelligent and quick to learn everything she taught her so she decided to take her as a disciple (Todai). She taught Yim Wing Chun advanced / high level Shaolin Kung Fu at the temple for 3 years. One day in the temple gardens Yim Wing Chun witnessed a fight between a Crane and a poisonous Snake. Using its beak and claws the crane defeated the snake. After this incident she modified the Crane’s attack actions and fused it with the Kung Fu she already knew to create a new fist method. Even though this method was short it utilised both hard and soft power, using small precise actions to use the opponents force against him, the fist changes were fast and often using softness to defeat hardness. When she invented this new method she kept it to herself.

Also at this time there was a Young man named *Leung Bak Sau who when he was younger had a foster father who also had four natural sons. The foster father was the Linage holder of Choy Family Kung Fu. Due to his good character and skill the foster father past on the title of linage holder to Leung Bak Sau before he past away. The real sons where not happy about this and caused trouble for him. Therefore Leung Bak Sau agreed to hand over the title to them. He then decided to move away to another village to become a school teacher. This village happened to be the village where Yim Wing Chun lived. One day Leung Bak Sau saw Yim Wing Chun practising her Kung Fu. Her method was odd and did not look effective so thinking that the way she was training looked silly, he teased and made fun of her. She was thin skinned and easily took offense. She wanted to challenge him so she asked her father and he gave his permission. Leung Bak Sau was soundly beaten by Yim Wing Chun. A romance ensued and they got married after which she taught him her Kung Fu. Two years after the marriage Yim Say passed away and Leung Bak Sau and Yim Wing Chun moved to a village in Guangdong.

In the olden days in china the opera was known as Ban Chung. Leung Bak Sau didn’t belong to the Ban Chung people but being an Opera lover as well as a Ming sympathizer he came into contact with a lot of the members of the Opera House people. He took 13 Students and out of all of them he took the four best fighters in the group to be his disciples. The four disciples were: Cheng Dan Kam (Yik Kam), Leung Lan Gai, Leung Tee Tai, Wong Wah Bo.

He did not have a name for his Kung Fu so when asked he named it Wing Chun in honour of his wife.

Leong Lan Gai moved to Sam Soi, it isn’t known if he took any disciples. Wong Wah Boe & Leung Yee Tai took a disciple called Leung Jan who became famous for his fighting skill in Fatsan. When Yik Kam returned to his home town of Poon Yee and taught the Cho family.

www.banchungchogawingchun.com

For the record "Wing Chun" passed down from Yik Kam has only four sets - SLT, Muk Yan Jong, Yan Yee (Bat Jam) Doe, Luk Dim Pun Gwan. Of course Cho family has many other sets of Kung Fu but the above are the core.

Yeun Kay San people still have a 3 section SLT...?
Chan Wah Shun passed down 13+ sets to his son -> grandson? go figure?

No mention of Ermei has been made to me by elders in Penang, Singapore and China nor when questioned have they any knowledge of any association. This is the research of Hendrik and I believe he said his sifu, Cho Hong Choi, also. Cho Hong Choi Sifu, known as the Kung Fu "King" in Penang at a time when triads and schools challenged & fought all the time sometimes fatally. As Hendrik knows our family Kung Fu the aim is to beat the emeny as swiftly and effectively as possible. He now seems to have chilled out in his older life and is researching and delving deeper into the art as he see's it and I think he as found what he is looking for from his posts. And the very best to him. It's not what he is saying that seems to an issue to everyone but how he say's it ;-) imho.

Wing Chun is Wing Chun it's how YOU choose apply it that is the difference, hard, soft, soft/hard, hard/soft, forceful, evading.....etc all depends on your attributes. If you have strength then your a fool if you don't use it, if you weaker then your a fool to test your strength against a stronger person and should use other tactic's, common sense really.

I hope this post answers some questions.

FongSung

12-16-2010, 11:18 AM

Big differnce's based on what?
A statement that our SLT encompasses all the 3 forms of others.

Or on content?
Have you seen all the Cho Family lineages SLT in it's full or at all?

Firehawk4

12-16-2010, 12:43 PM

Yuen Kay Sans Brother Yuen Chai Wan only taught 1 form Sui Lien Tao and no Bill Jee or Chum Kiu Forms Yuen Chai Wan taught Yui Choi and the Ethnic Chinese in Vietnam only as far as is Known the Sui Lien Tao form plus wooden dummy and the Knives form and Baat Sic Danda Bamboo Dummy. But as you said Yuen Kay San new all the basic 3 forms do you know if or if Yuen Chai Wan new the Chum Kui and Bill Jee Forms ? Also i herd some student of Leung Jan named Low Kwai only learned along Sui Lien Tao form do you know anything about this ?

FongSung

12-16-2010, 01:44 PM

It's believed by a lot elders, from other lineages also, that originally wing chun had only one long fist set, Siu Lien Tao, which included all the movements of Siu Nim Tao & Chum Kiu & Biu Jee. If you are who I think you already know all his :)

I have been told that Yuen Chai Wan passed on Siu Lien Tao + Siu Lam forms + Hard & Soft Nei Gung, and it was his students that created the 3 forms for whatever reason. You are better off contacting the various schools yourself in Vietnam as many have websites these days. But they may be reluctant to open up even in face to face unless you have something similar to offer.

I am not a researcher and comparatively new to this TCMA.
Saying that Low Kwai's name is familiar I may look into it.

Runlikehell

12-16-2010, 06:01 PM

I have been told that Yuen Chai Wan passed on Siu Lien Tao + Siu Lam forms + Hard & Soft Nei Gung, and it was his students that created the 3 forms for whatever reason. You are better off contacting the various schools yourself in Vietnam as many have websites these days. But they may be reluctant to open up even in face to face unless you have something similar to offer.

I heard that Yuen Chai Wan passed on Siu Lien Tao, Chum Kiu and Biu Jee (as well as the weapons forms and dummy form) to Yiu Choi and the ethnic Chinese he taught in Vietnam and Cambodia. The other forms may have been added in by ethnic Vietnamese students. I've also heard that he passed on different curriculums in North and South Vietnam. Could be wrong though.

I got that info from here:
http://www.wingchunpedia.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php?n=WCP.VietnamWingChun

There's also a detailed answer here, check "Huang Ti's" response.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080330095621AAHl0Xp

I wonder if he passed any forms on to his son.

Saying that Low Kwai's name is familiar I may look into it.

If it helps, Lo Kwai has also been referred to as Chao Lo Kwai, and Chiu Yuk Kwai.

horserider

12-19-2010, 02:10 PM

My name is Danny Chao and the Leung Jan student you speak of Chao Lo Kwai is my ancestor. To avoid some misinformation I will provide what short answer on what we preserve.

We practice 4 forms plus dummy ,pole and knife. The 3 forms as known plus one long form derived from the original long form taught by Wong Wah Bo.

In our passed down writings it is said Leung Yee Tai taught from shorter San Sik and Wong Wah Bo taught from one long form. Leung Jan learned from both. He worked with Wong Wah Bo to combine the teachings of his two Sifu. This resulted in the 3 forms as practiced today.

This is what we preserve but it does not mean it is correct . I wish not to argue with those that have a belief in something else.

t_niehoff

12-19-2010, 04:54 PM

Very interesting. Thanks.

Runlikehell

12-19-2010, 05:38 PM

I agree with T. Thanks for the post.

Hendrik

12-19-2010, 06:36 PM

Thanks and appreciate for the excellent information!

Hendrik

12-19-2010, 06:37 PM

In our passed down writings it is said Leung Yee Tai taught from shorter San Sik and Wong Wah Bo taught from one long form.

Leung Jan learned from both. He worked with Wong Wah Bo to combine the teachings of his two Sifu. This resulted in the 3 forms as practiced today.

Great answer to the core question.

why do we not see that in any other line but the one coming from YK? And if the 1 form got split into 3, why is it still one from only in YK WC? ....

(And this isn't even taking into account those lines that don't trace back thru WWB or red boats that also have the 3 traditional forms.) ;)

Obviously YK WCK is not alone.

Now one got to ask, why is those different color flags WCK which surface in the 2000, who claim to be original WCK has 3 forms from Shao Lin at 1600's while LJ exit in 1850?

RB93SAAT

12-19-2010, 10:48 PM

hendrik claims that yik kam's slt is the original wing chun originating from o-mei and crane. how can this be original wing chun when wong wah bo's wing chun already exsisted prior to yik kam? how can yik kam's wing chun be original when they themselve believe that their ancestor is yim wing chun, the creator of their wing chun? from this position is where I disagree that yik kam's slt is the original wing chun. here's an anology. bruce lee learned wing chun from yip man, and created JKD. but bruce lee never called his martial art original wing chun in front of ip man. in history, yik kam never addressed his self creation yik kam's slt 'excercises' (o-mei + crane) as original wing chun in front of wong wah bo and leung yee tai. how could yik kam make such claim if yim wing chun and wong wah bo already existed prior to yik kam?

the history of wing chun has always been muddy, some claim chi sim as the creator, some claim yim wing chun etc...some new version of wing chun which mixed with o-mei, crane, hung ga or ngo cho kun, later also come to make a lot noise about being the orginal wing chun. that is the most rediculous claim. that's like claiming the sun rises in the west. saying wing chun came from omei and crane knowing that wong wah bo's wing chun existed before yik kam contradicts known history. all of this evidence shows that wing chun history with any association to omei and crane is false and totally absurd.

Hendrik

12-19-2010, 11:30 PM

hendrik claims that yik kam's slt is the original wing chun originating from o-mei and crane.

I have never make the claim that Yik Kam's SLT is the original.

the point is we know now both WWB and YK is doing ONE LONG FORM, not three form. That means in the Red Boat, it is true that One Long form was taught.

The thread of Wing Chun is a fusion of Snake and Crane is well known. Wing Chun with Emei /kwan Xi connection is also well know via YKS and Koo Lo lineage.

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/modules.php?name=Encyclopedia&op=content&tid=48&query=miu%20shun

There is nothing new but the truth get closer and closer.

Sorry, it is not what you like to hear and see.

but you have NO CHANCE to twist it disregards how you trying to create some nonsense about me.

hahaha, I rest my case here because I am sooooo happy. Now it is up to you guys to proof your own stuffs. Not my problem. I am done with these. hahaha

LoneTiger108

12-20-2010, 04:32 AM

I just wanted to say how interesting this particular thread is becoming as I'm seeing more 'new' members (?) who have clear information about their Wing Chun origins that actually sound very similar to the Lee Shing family I belong to.

I especially remember chatting with my Sifu and trying to piece together Lee Shings movements before he came to the UK and Vietnam and Malaysia were mentioned. Its interesting to me because back then our art was referred to as Gok Seut, or National Art, not the Wushu we all hear of today. Lee Shing apparently travelled to these locations during his own research days and its fascinating to hear of four forms and the fusion of Wong Wah Bo and Leung Yee Tais art through Leung Jan. This makes sense and links to the DNT form Lee Shing taught his closest students.

Its also very nice to hear Yiu Chois name here, as he too was close to Lee Shing and I believe even Wai Po Tang had learnt from him too, another front runner in the Wing Chun craziness of the eighties in the UK!

A good little thread imho full of good first-hand information, for once...

t_niehoff

12-20-2010, 04:51 AM

I have never make the claim that Yik Kam's SLT is the original.

the point is we know now both WWB and YK is doing ONE LONG FORM, not three form. That means in the Red Boat, it is true that One Long form was taught.

I never understood Hendrik to make the claim that Yik Kam WCK was the "true original" WCK (unlike others), only that on the Red Boats the SLT was originally one set.

It seemed likely that it was Wong Wah Bo that choreographed the three sets (SLT, CK, BJ) considering that his two students, Leung Jan and Fok Bo Cheung, both subsequently taught the same three sets.

IMO WCK existed on the Red Boats, and that there existed several different types of curriculum for teaching it also on the Red Boat (one form, three forms, san sik).

KPM

12-20-2010, 09:16 AM

Wayfaring

12-20-2010, 11:03 AM

The thread of Wing Chun is a fusion of Snake and Crane is well known. Wing Chun with Emei /kwan Xi connection is also well know via YKS and Koo Lo lineage.

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/modules.php?name=Encyclopedia&op=content&tid=48&query=miu%20shun

There is nothing new but the truth get closer and closer.

The lineage in that link originates from Ng Mui the nun. Which the vast majority of researchers regard as a myth as opposed to a real person.

How exactly does this cause the "truth get closer and closer" and prove your snake / crane fusion theory?

t_niehoff

12-20-2010, 11:14 AM

The lineage in that link originates from Ng Mui the nun. Which the vast majority of researchers regard as a myth as opposed to a real person.

I can't imagine any intelligent, informed person believing that the Ng Mui story is factually true. It is an allegory, a story used to illustrate something.

There is no good evidence anywhere -- none -- that provides any proof of WCK's existence prior to the Red Boats. I think all the available evidence points to WCK originating on the Red Boats in the early 1800s. Everything else is either theory or legend.

Origin legends are just that -- legends up to when they can be independently verified with good, sound evidence.

How exactly does this cause the "truth get closer and closer" and prove your snake / crane fusion theory?

We will never know where, how, etc. WCK originated. Theories are just that -- theories. They are attempts to take what we do know and extrapolate backwards in time. Hendrik's theory is a possibility, a sound possibility. But I can think of other possibilities too.

In the end analysis, it is all mental m@sturbation.

Hendrik

12-20-2010, 11:31 AM

1, The lineage in that link originates from Ng Mui the nun. Which the vast majority of researchers regard as a myth as opposed to a real person.

2, How exactly does this cause the "truth get closer and closer" and

3,prove your snake / crane fusion theory?

1, Without a real person to do the job, WCK will not happen as any real human being knows.

however, Ng Mui is just a nick name of the person who brought White crane from Fujian into the WCK creation. Ng Mui is just a symbol of White Crane from Fujian. What important is to know the White Crane fujian source.

2, One long form in the red boat era at the WWB, Yik Kam generation. if one's WCK branch out from the post LJ-WWB time, then One long form is a teaching method.

3, Snake and crane fusion is not my theory but ancestors' passed down in WCK lineages.

Evidences speak for themselves.
Even VTM today has already confirm the White Crane of fujian connection, not to mention in ASIA White Crane of fujian with WCK connection is a known fact.

the snake signature is all over the sets of WCK be it in the long form which was taught in the Red boat era pre Leung Jan, and Leung Jan -WWB creation of the three sets including the Koo Lo no sets.

My part of description including the one set in post WWB era has one by one confirmed since last decades, with more and more WCK lineage open up and reveal their inheritance.

Now the question is for you and your team who believe in Shao Lin WCK as the original WCK, who keep posting the anti- one long set of WCK in Red boat era in this forum.

how is your Shao lin fit into the pictures? Which Shao Lin (presume there is a shao lin which shao lin? what type of art?).?

why it is you are practicing post WWB ( after 1850) 3 sets and missing the pre WWB (1840) one long set? isnt it the burning of Shao lin and down fall of Ming as you claim is in 1650's? so why are you follow the LJ-WWB invention?

why is it White Crane of Fujian is in WCK instead of Shao Lin (presume there is a shao lin which shao lin? what type of art?).......?

if you can explain what you claim, that will be created contribute to the Truth of WCK.
if you cant explain with evidence on your part, isnt that a good contribution to the truth of WCK too?

and with the following announcement

"Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Paai in their position that their lineage traces back to time period Hung Gun Biu, and has nothing to do with the flag system based secret societies that came out of the Shaolin Temple. There is published evidence from many researchers in the 1800s, 1900s, and 2000s supporting the existence of the flag system in the founding of the Hung Men. The VTM will no longer promote the Hung Fa Yi system under the umbrella term of Shaolin Wing Chun, and will no longer state that this lineage traces its origins directly back to the origins of Wing Chun in the Southern Shaolin Temple, and is – instead – the creation of one person: Si Jo Hung Gun Biu."

http://mengsmartialarts.com/forum/index.php/topic,980.0.html

Does it mean Hung Gar Bui exist in the time after LJ-WWB? at the time Lee Man Mau leads the uprising after 1850?

Wayfaring

12-20-2010, 11:57 AM

however, Ng Mui is just a nick name of the person who brought White crane from Fujian into the WCK creation. Ng Mui is just a symbol of White Crane from Fujian. What important is to know the White Crane fujian source.

So in your "proof", there is a mythical person who is a legend, but don't pay attention to that part of the proof?

2, One long form in the red boat era at the WWB, Yik Kam generation. if one's WCK branch out from the post LJ-WWB time, then One long form is a teaching method.

A bunch of speculation on one vs. three and timelines. We know one teacher did this, but not what happened in all other famillies.

3, Snake and crane fusion is not my theory but ancestors' passed down in WCK lineages.

Evidences speak for themselves.

The evidence that speaks for itself is apparantly you are somewhat mixed up betwen the words "theory", "evidence", and "fact".

Even VTM today has already confirm the White Crane of fujian connection, not to mention in ASIA White Crane of fujian with WCK connection is a known fact.

the snake signature is all over the sets of WCK be it in the long form which was taught in the Red boat era pre Leung Jan, and Leung Jan -WWB creation of the three sets including the Koo Lo no sets.

Sorry - I don't really follow VTM conclusions. They've proven to have a great deal of bias involved with research. But then again that seems to be the norm for WCK in general.

My part of description including the one set in post WWB era has one by one confirmed since last decades, with more and more WCK lineage open up and reveal their inheritance.

Yes. And some you like, and others you don't like so much. Your bias.

Now the question is for you and your team who believe in Shao Lin WCK as the original WCK, who keep posting the anti- one long set of WCK in Red boat era in this forum.

how is that Shao lin fit into the pictures? Which Shao Lin (presume there is a shao lin which shao lin? what type of art?).?

No idea. We have some more clear oral tradition from Hung Gun Biu. Prior to that oral tradition connection to Cheung Ng. Other than that, I'll ask more of the historians like my sifu next time I see him.

why it is you are practicing post WWB ( after 1850) 3 sets and missing the pre WWB (1840) one long set? isnt it the burning of Shao lin and down fall of Ming as you claim is in 1650's?

Who says it's missing? Even the stories you have says it gets split for teaching purposes even if all was combined first.

why is it White Crane of Fujian is in WCK instead of Shao Lin (presume there is a shao lin which shao lin? what type of art?).......?

I'm not much of a historian, but in most of what I have heard, I thought that during the Ming dynasty, which is somewhat correlated to the Rennaisance period in Europe, that in a similar fashion to how Rennaisance artists all knew each other and collaborated, so did the martial artists of southern China. Through the flow in and out of the temples as religious centers also are community centers, people trained together and exchanged ideas. Today they just all argue on the Internet and never spar together.

if you can explain what you claim, that will be created contribute to the Truth of WCK.
if you cant explain with evidence on your part, isnt that a good contribution to the truth of WCK too?
I don't claim anything. I see a huge disparity in what I call evidence and what you call evidence. I just share a few stories from my limited knowledge of my family WCK and oral traditions and the application of it.

Hendrik

12-20-2010, 12:12 PM

I see a huge disparity in what I call evidence and what you call evidence.

I just share a few stories from my limited knowledge of my family WCK and oral traditions and the application of it.

I dont claim I know it all , I shared what I know, just that simple.

if everyone focus their own issues and get that clear,
that will be a great help to WCK.

I leave this discussion here and

hope you to show us more evidence support your family's stories soon.

Wayfaring

12-20-2010, 12:16 PM

"Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Paai in their position that their lineage traces back to time period Hung Gun Biu, and has nothing to do with the flag system based secret societies that came out of the Shaolin Temple. There is published evidence from many researchers in the 1800s, 1900s, and 2000s supporting the existence of the flag system in the founding of the Hung Men. The VTM will no longer promote the Hung Fa Yi system under the umbrella term of Shaolin Wing Chun, and will no longer state that this lineage traces its origins directly back to the origins of Wing Chun in the Southern Shaolin Temple, and is – instead – the creation of one person: Si Jo Hung Gun Biu."

http://mengsmartialarts.com/forum/index.php/topic,980.0.html

Does it mean Hung Gar Bui exist in the time after LJ-WWB? at the time Lee Man Mau leads the uprising after 1850?

First, it is Hung Gun Biu. Second, that name is an alias of some sort - "Red Bandana" Biu.

Next, from the MKF book p. 28 the lineage is:

Cheung Ng (Tan Sau Ng)->Chang Jing Lin->Chan Sai Yuan->Chan Bo Jung->Hung Gun Biu.

Other excerpts from the book indicate Hung Gun Biu was during the Red Boats time and taught a public version of his WCK that included SLT and some drilling techniques (p.42).

So congratulations, you've now turned a thread around that has questions about your research and conclusions into something not talking about that at all. That's called "deflection".

So where is the book you wrote that contains all of your research and conclusions? The "evidence", "truth", and "facts"? What is the ISBN? Usually the publishing process includes technical editing which has a process in place for checking references are accurate and sources.

Because, after all,

if you can explain what you claim, that will be created contribute to the Truth of WCK.
if you cant explain with evidence on your part, isnt that a good contribution to the truth of WCK too?

Hendrik

12-20-2010, 12:32 PM

you've now turned a thread around that has questions about your research and conclusions into something not talking about that at all. That's called "deflection".

1, this thread starts with questioning YK WCK and the one long SLT set. Questioning Yik Kam ......etc. it is not about discussing my research.

Trying to create a case to make ONE LONG SLT set YK transmit incomplete or unlegitimate with one's bias assumption.

Originally Posted by JPinAZ View Post

Also, how can most all other lines that draw down from Yim Wing Chun, or even Wong Wah Bo (Yik Kam's senior) already have 3 hand forms ...

why do we not see that in any other line but the one coming from YK? And if the 1 form got split into 3, why is it still one from only in YK WC? ....

(And this isn't even taking into account those lines that don't trace back thru WWB or red boats that also have the 3 traditional forms.)

and

what we find out from other neutral WCK older lineage is that ONE LONG SET is the pre LJ - WWB practice in the Red boat before the existance of the three sets concept which is responsible by WWB and LJ.

So, the conclusion is YK is legitimate and Cho family tradition is following the Pre WWB-LJ tradition.

2, since the title of this thread is "Another look at Wing Chun History/Mystery" communication goes two ways.

My ancestors identity and teaching and art is open for discussion as above under the bright sun.
so does your ancestors identity, teaching, and art right?

so, it is your time to find evidence to support your story for every WCK lineage is equal.
There is nothing beyond the title of this thread for looking into your ancestors past.

However, I can understand, if your mentality is just a one way street, and entertainment try to pick at other's ancestors but keep an upper hand,
then please dont discuss because you might be not able to support your story under the sun.

So, you dont have to participate in this discussion, that is OK with me. and I rest my discussion here.

Wayfaring

12-20-2010, 01:44 PM

what we find out from other neutral WCK older lineage is that ONE LONG SET is the pre LJ - WWB practice in the Red boat before the existance of the three sets concept which is responsible by WWB and LJ.

So, the conclusion is YK is legitimate and Cho family tradition is following the Pre WWB-LJ tradition.

Good thing you posted this logic, as it pretty much preserves the way you "prove" something or come to conclusions.

In the real world, we found another oral account of one long set being taught by one WCK family, that is all.

2, since the title of this thread is "Another look at Wing Chun History/Mystery" communication goes two ways.

My ancestors identity and teaching and art is open for discussion as above under the bright sun.
so does your ancestors identity, teaching, and art right?

so, it is your time to find evidence to support your story for every WCK lineage is equal.
There is nothing beyond the title of this thread for looking into your ancestors past.

No, if you're trying to use the words "prove", "evidence", "conclusion", "fact", in reality it's your time to write up your conclusions in a book and present us with the ISBN so we can be sure that facts are checked in the common manner as happens with the publishing cycle.

I already quoted you a book with an ISBN, and oral tradition. Now, your turn.

However, I can understand, if your mentality is just a one way street, and entertainment try to pick at other's ancestors but keep an upper hand,
then please dont discuss because you might be not able to support your story under the sun.

So, you dont have to participate in this discussion, that is OK with me. and I rest my discussion here.
I can understand if you are used to traveling down a one way street and not looking where you are going like you are, that when you see other traffic you might be really sensitive and think someone is trying to run you over.

However, in reality the street has two ways.

Hendrik

12-20-2010, 02:25 PM

I already quoted you a book with an ISBN, and oral tradition.

ISBN and oral tradition means the truth?

Great to know your logic.

Thanks!

Eric_H

12-20-2010, 03:11 PM

Being published means you have to have sources. Your sources will be checked. This independent verification leads to higher credibility.

When something is oral tradition, it needs to be designated as such. This does not mean it is true or untrue, merely that it has not been verified.

In the Yik Kam story here are the disputed items:

1. Wong Wa Bo wing chun existed at the same time and is a different format.
2. Other Wing Chun doesn't have the snake+crane "signature" that Yik Kam's does.
3. Other Wing Chun has SNT/CK/BJ forms and weapons, Yik Kam's does not.
4. Yik Kam has been reported to have studied arts additional to WCK and imported pieces of those arts into something he called "Yik Kam Siu Lien Tao" - Yik Kam's Drilling Method.

To me, this raises two questions: Why would Yik Kam call his art something other than Wing Chun unless he felt it significantly different to the WCK he had learned? And, why is it so unbelievable that a member of the red boats (martial arts melting pot) would combine several arts together?

Wayfaring

12-20-2010, 03:18 PM

ISBN and oral tradition means the truth?

Great to know your logic.

Thanks!

No it does not mean they are truth, it means exactly what I said they are - my sources.

In stating the sources openly and directly, I am not doing what you are - that is, calling something "the truth", "evidence", or "fact" when they are none of the above or not established as such.

Eric's point is exactly right - it's independantly verified. He also did a great job of summarizing the points in the Yik Kam story that are needing sources or have questions related to them.

Hendrik

12-20-2010, 03:54 PM

Eric's point is exactly right - it's independantly verified.

He also did a great job of summarizing the points in the Yik Kam story that are needing sources or have questions related to them.

Thanks again for your team logic.

Wayfaring

12-20-2010, 04:02 PM

Thanks again for your team logic.

Thanks again for not answering any questions.

Vajramusti

12-20-2010, 05:00 PM

Hendrik

12-20-2010, 05:08 PM

FongSung

12-20-2010, 05:18 PM

Wayfaring

12-20-2010, 09:27 PM

On ISBN:

Any publisher can just fill out a form and get an ISBN number. An ISBN number has little to do
with the accuracy of a book"s content. Lots of self published books have ISBN numbers.

In the scholarly world academic (not commercial) presses send manuscripts to anonymous teams of experts in the field. Even then there can be "politics" in the publication process.

joy chaudhuri

Joy,

While there are certainly drawbacks to the publishing world and process, there is more quality control and source checking in that world than there is in say for example, an online forum such as this, or even Wikipedia.

For books that are published by someone other than themselves such as a publishing company, which is the context of what I was talking about, this is certainly true.

Or is your point that when you see a source that has an ISBN, we should ignore that and instead go with the opinions of random posters in online interest group forums because they say they have facts and evidence?

Commercial presses tend to hire someone with credentials in the field that the book is being written in and pay a standard small fee for content editing. They do this to verify the quality of their content as it represents an investment.

Academic textbooks on the other hand many times represent some of the worst in the publishing industry. There is a lot more politics, price gouging, and similar on that side of it.

Please clarify what exactly you're getting at here.

Wayfaring

12-20-2010, 09:33 PM

So the majority of you think the "rebels" on the red junks didn't learn any kung fu before learning from "leung bak sao". All the years before they were operating they didn't bother too learn anything else? really?

Ban Chung opera had so much kung fu which is well known and documented by others.

No I think the red boats were probably rich exchange centers, much like the Shaolin temples earlier. The Rennnaisance period spilled over to following times and the rule of the Qing most likely forced that kind of exchange heightened in the Ming dynasty underground in later times.

Hendrik

12-20-2010, 09:53 PM

Joy,

While there are certainly drawbacks to the publishing world and process, there is more quality control and source checking in that world than there is in say for example, an online forum such as this, or even Wikipedia.

For books that are published by someone other than themselves such as a publishing company, which is the context of what I was talking about, this is certainly true.

Or is your point that when you see a source that has an ISBN, we should ignore that and instead go with the opinions of random posters in online interest group forums because they say they have facts and evidence?

Commercial presses tend to hire someone with credentials in the field that the book is being written in and pay a standard small fee for content editing. They do this to verify the quality of their content as it represents an investment.

Academic textbooks on the other hand many times represent some of the worst in the publishing industry. There is a lot more politics, price gouging, and similar on that side of it.

Please clarify what exactly you're getting at here.

one of the author of this book --- Mastering Kung Fu : Featuring Shaolin Wing Chun

http://newwestminster.bibliocommons.com/item/show/466260033_mastering_kung_fu_featuring_shaolin_wing _chun

just changes his mind and make a public announcement of his new finding.

"Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Paai in their position that their lineage traces back to time period Hung Gun Biu, and has nothing to do with the flag system based secret societies that came out of the Shaolin Temple.

There is published evidence from many researchers in the 1800s, 1900s, and 2000s supporting the existence of the flag system in the founding of the Hung Men.

The VTM will no longer promote the Hung Fa Yi system under the umbrella term of Shaolin Wing Chun,

and will no longer state that this lineage traces its origins directly back to the origins of Wing Chun in the Southern Shaolin Temple, and is – instead – the creation of one person: Si Jo Hung Gun Biu."

http://mengsmartialarts.com/forum/in...pic,980.0.html

The Shao Lin Wing Chun in the title of the book is no longer true? or can the other author back up his Shao Lin Wing Chun claim and keep the title of the book ?

So how credible is this book with its ISBN?
and where is the quality of the information verify by which experts in the field which cant even sustain up to a decade.

Can anyone qoute this book to expect a credible information?

Wayfaring

12-20-2010, 10:06 PM

So how credible is this book with its ISBN? and where is the quality of the information verify by which experts in the field which cant even sustain up to a decade.

Even with all that it still is quite a bit more credible than someone posting random threads on the Internet such as yourself.

And besides, quit spreading misinformation. VTM still concludes a shaolin connection. The quote was in response to HFY saying their oral tradition doesn't involve any flags at all.

Also, the post was a question to Joy, not you.

Hendrik

12-20-2010, 10:22 PM

Even with all that it still is quite a bit more credible than someone posting random threads on the Internet such as yourself.

And besides, quit spreading misinformation. VTM still concludes a shaolin connection. The quote was in response to HFY saying their oral tradition doesn't involve any flags at all.

Also, the post was a question to Joy, not you.

Sure, your logic.

As for my posts, I always supports the red boat WCK ancestors' teaching for past decades.

and even one of the author of that Mastering kung fu Book, now go with the Ancestors teaching which I share, after his research, White Crane of Fujian is a mother art of Fujian.

That is how credible or how not credible on the Ancestors' teaching.

As for your arguement of

VTM still concludes a shaolin connection. The quote was in response to HFY saying their oral tradition doesn't involve any flags at all.

nice try.

let see,

The VTM will no longer promote the Hung Fa Yi system under the umbrella term of Shaolin Wing Chun,

and will no longer state that this lineage traces its origins directly back to the origins of Wing Chun in the Southern Shaolin Temple, and is – instead – the creation of one person: Si Jo Hung Gun Biu."

isnt it you are the master of English language? now you cant read?

Who is Hung Gun Biu? according to VTM that is his creation, not Shao Lin Temple, so to be accurate, it is Hung Gun Biu Wing Chun not Shao lin Wing Chun isnt it?

Where is your team mate that Arizona guy, the WWB expert, now Why dont him tell us is Hung Gun Biu comes before or after WWB? according to his three sets theory Hung Gun Biu must come after WWB-LJ ? Please enlightent us.

Joy or me what is the different? your ISBN credibility stuffs doesnt hold and this is a solid example.

With the addresing from VTM, The book's title needs to change to Hung Gun Biu Wing Chun not Shao Lin Wing Chun which is misleading.

Wayfaring

12-20-2010, 10:25 PM

As for my posts, I always supports the red boat WCK ancestors' teaching for past decades.
...

Who is Hung Gun Biu?

A red boat WCK ancestor. So now practice what you preach and show proper support.

Hendrik

12-20-2010, 10:40 PM

A red boat WCK ancestor. So now practice what you preach and show proper support.

Wait a minute, what is his real name?

WWB, LYT, YK, CS..... who were in the list are real name but no Hung Gun Biu sorry.

if you have his real name I will support, otherwise is this person real or like Ng Mui ?

since he is teaching with 3 sets, he must be post WWB -LJ era no wonder there is no knowledge on the one long set? but that is you and your Arizona team mate's job to find out.

and how credible is a nick name? tell us, isnt it in your previous post you are totally against Ng Mui...etc and request for real name real person....etc? now it is your time to provide us all the real stuffs as you demand. Again, Wang Wah Bo, Leung Yi Tai, Yik Kam, Cho Soon were all real name and real person you need to get a real identifiable person to get into the list.

Hendrik

12-20-2010, 10:58 PM

Confucius says "What you do not wish for yourself, do not do to others."

There is lots of truth in the saying, one doesnt know when the wind blown in other direction.

Yee or rigtheousness in Chinese means to give a room to others so that others can live in comfort instead of critical and self-rigtheousness to press the other to death.

These are very Chinese traditional and most in the West doesnt understand this culture and doesnt practice it. However that is a part of Wu De.

May be this is the time for all of us start to learn these old tradition.

Here I sign off from this thread. So long.

Vajramusti

12-20-2010, 11:14 PM

Joy,

Or is your point that when you see a source that has an ISBN, we should ignore that and instead go with the opinions of random posters in online interest group forums because they say they have facts and evidence?
((That is not what I said. I merely pointed out that having an ISBN number says little about the quality of the content.Also, I usually returned student papers as being unacceptable if they depended on Wikipedia or net chats as the main authoritative sources.I read extensively and make up my own mind on what I read. Ever so often on the net one can get an insight into something on a subject of interest...that is worth cross checking or trying out experimentally.
When it comes to contemporary martial arts however-the published works have poorer standards than in several other fields. And- contemporary wing chun "literature" is pretty poor. The art is greater than it's literature by far.)))joy

Commercial presses tend to hire someone with credentials in the field that the book is being written in and pay a standard small fee for content editing. They do this to verify the quality of their content as it represents an investment.

((The world of commerce values marketability and possible profit above other values. Note your choice of words...investment"))joy

Academic textbooks on the other hand many times represent some of the worst in the publishing industry. There is a lot more politics, price gouging, and similar on that side of it.

((In academia- publishing a text book is not the height of scholarship. But atleast at a university level individual faculty pick the texts. In the high schools individual teachers have little discretion
on what textbooks can be used. Note the recent controversy on what would be acceptable content in Texas schools regarding history.University Presses which generally do not mass produce textbooks usually have non commercial standards-though they too face pressures in this economy))joy

Please clarify what exactly you're getting at here.

((Getting at? I only pointed out that having an ISBN number has little to do with the quality of the content.Most threads on this forum quickly go astray and I was not getting at anything else.))joy
joy chaudhuri

LoneTiger108

12-21-2010, 09:20 AM

I just wanted to say how interesting this particular thread is becoming as I'm seeing more 'new' members (?) who have clear information about their Wing Chun origins that actually sound very similar to the Lee Shing family I belong to....

A good little thread imho full of good first-hand information, for once...

Hmmm! I take that back as it's become a bit of a "handbags at dawn" experience.

Vajramusti

12-21-2010, 10:14 AM

Hmmm! I take that back as it's become a bit of a "handbags at dawn" experience.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Second thoughts have their strengths!

joy chaudhuri

taokum

12-21-2010, 11:25 AM

Even VTM today has already confirm the White Crane of fujian connection

Hendrik Santos, now you believe VTM and give credibility to VTM. Hendrik feeling good that VTM confirms his-story.

had a lengthy discussion with the Grand Master, Sifu Ku Choi Wah, from Malaysia, his lineage was part of the Cho Ga Wing Chun, also sometimes referred to as Opera Wing Chun. He is the current, leading authority of this branch. I also met Sifu Tony Yap Yew Wei of the same Cho Ga lineage, but a different branch from Sifu Ku….
… people who don’t always know a lot seem to be the ones that speak the most, or make the most noise online. Sifu Ku mentioned to me about one particular person by name in the US that has been making a lot of noise and presenting himself as an expert on the Cho Ga lineage but really don’t know all that much about the lineage itself. http://mengsmartialarts.com/forum/index.php?topic=1002.0

But there a problem, based on VTM writing, Benny Meng has different opinion of you than approving of you.

taokum

12-21-2010, 11:31 AM

chusauli

12-21-2010, 11:42 AM

For the record, Hendrik has never made any claims of Yik Kam SLT as the "original" form. Also, he does not publicly teach, nor interested in commercial schools or making money in WCK.

And he was kind enough to share with Ku Choi Wah and other Cho family members.

His POV is based on documents passed down from Cho Hung Choi and his own extensive research in the martial arts world.

We should be grateful there is a completely verifiable and documented source of WCK passed on down through Yik Kam.

Hendrik

12-21-2010, 11:54 AM

All this evidence on Omei doesn’t make sense to Santos his-story so he (Hendrik) is looking for shelter under Benny Meng. Looking to VTM to vouch his(Hendrik's) Omei opinion. I think Benny Meng is only interested in promoting 5 flag wing chun but even Benny Meng is having difficulty to vouch himself in the true martial arts community. 5 flag wing chun never exist in history. The real 5 flags society is well document as bandits.

1, I dont shelter under whom. in the past decades, I speak for myself. tell the same story and never changes but more and more details are added when time passed. YOu like it you dont like it that is fine with me. Those who truely practice SLT everyday for more then 20 years will appreciate my view, those are who I share with.

2, What you think about Benny Meng is your own view. Even if he is a business man, that doesnt make the truth he speaks false.

3, If VTM is a research organization, then VTM cannot avoid to go the direction of Emei 12 Zhuang after the admitting of White Crane of Fujian today.

4, VTM might change later as they find out more, similar to the case of the previous Shao Lin Wing Chun now become a Hung Gun Biu Wing Chun which they publicly address.

5, You seem to hate Benny and the 5 flag soo much. Why dont you post your real name and lineage and address your view toward Benny publicly, that way you have your chance to say what you want to say and he has a chance to defend or clarify what he thinks. And you still dont have to buy what he thinks but doing it in a rational and gentlemen way with Wude.

Wayfaring

12-21-2010, 01:36 PM

and how credible is a nick name? tell us, isnt it in your previous post you are totally against Ng Mui...etc and request for real name real person....etc? now it is your time to provide us all the real stuffs as you demand. Again, Wang Wah Bo, Leung Yi Tai, Yik Kam, Cho Soon were all real name and real person you need to get a real identifiable person to get into the list.

On one side of the argument you post "verifiable evidence" with a link to a lineage with Ng Mui in it.

On the other side you attack the credibility of oral tradition that has the nickname or title of one ancestor.

It seems to me your struggle is with yourself. I'll leave you to it.

Wayfaring

12-21-2010, 01:39 PM

Joy or me what is the different? your ISBN credibility stuffs doesnt hold and this is a solid example.

Neither you nor Joy disproved the quite well known fact that publishing a book through a commercial publishing company and obtaining an ISBN involves more source checking than online posting. In fact it is surprising to me that Joy is arguing that as he has far too many credentials as a professor at a major university to lend his voice to that argument.

So what exactly about that doesn't hold?

With the addresing from VTM, The book's title needs to change to Hung Gun Biu Wing Chun not Shao Lin Wing Chun which is misleading.

No, the addressing from the VTM was a direct response to a public message from the HFY secretary that despite the VTM changing all references to flags that HFY history does not line up with the black flag research propounded most recently.

In other words, the VTM response you quoted was a politically based response as opposed to genuine research.

Wayfaring

12-21-2010, 01:47 PM

His POV is based on documents passed down from Cho Hung Choi and his own extensive research in the martial arts world.

Then let him put the genuine effort into publishing it so that this "extensive research" is documented and checked. You did, and your work with 2 other authors published over 12 years ago still stands.

We should be grateful there is a completely verifiable and documented source of WCK passed on down through Yik Kam.

I would be grateful too if there was something legitimately out there as opposed to half-thought through excerpts with highly emotional responses and attacks on other lineages who have gone through the effort to do this.

Vajramusti

12-21-2010, 03:50 PM

Wayfaring

12-21-2010, 04:24 PM

[QUOTE=Wayfaring;1068057]Neither you nor Joy disproved the quite well known fact that publishing a book through a commercial publishing company and obtaining an ISBN involves more source checking than online posting. In fact it is surprising to me that Joy is arguing that as he has far too many credentials as a professor at a major university to lend his voice to that argument.

((Read carefully again.1. Getting an ISBN number and or getting a commercial company to print something does not validate content.All kinds of fairy tales
and opinions and junk can get an ISBN number and or get published. Blind refereed journals and university press books which also have isbn numbers for ordering identification are a differrent breed. There are a few MA books and history books with references to MA that meet that category. None involving wing chun that I know of.2. I did NOT endorse on line chat list posting as scholarship- at any time. 3. I did not say that electronic info is superior to the printed word or vice versa.4.Chat list comments can be suggestive, stimulating, infuriating among other things- but it isn't published research. cause something is printed does not make it true.This is the second time on this thread that you are misrepresenting what I said.))Joy

Wow - a little touchy there? I've only responded to your posts twice, and the first one was to ask for clarification on your point. Is asking for clarification misrepresenting you somehow? Please elaborate.

Here - Hendrik is using your statement about ISBN's to substantiate an attack on a book written mostly by my sifu. You are not jumping all over him at all like you are me, so I'm inferring you agree with him.

My position is that at least someone who has gone through the exercise of working with a publisher has more research credibility than someone who has not as there is a process that is adhered to. Are you disagreeing that in the process of publishing that content is not checked? Sounds like you are. Perhaps you need to familiarize yourself a little more with that field, as it seems like in your quote "All kinds of fairy tales and opinions and junk can get an ISBN number and or get published" you are making a quite broad generalization of the overall publishing industry that may only apply to self-published material or material that is published by a non-reputable publisher.

Like it or not, the exercise of getting published does increase credibility.

Also interesting in this discussion, if your position is accurate and getting published is no guarantee of truth now, what about all those sources that were published within the last 300 years that people are basing all of their conclusions currently about WCK history on? How are they any less "all kinds of fairy tales and opinions and junk"?

Vajramusti

12-21-2010, 09:21 PM

[QUOTE=Wayfaring;1068109][QUOTE=Vajramusti;1068105]

Wow - a little touchy there? I've only responded to your posts twice, and the first one was to ask for clarification on your point. Is asking for clarification misrepresenting you somehow? Please elaborate.(Wayfaring)

(( Touchy? No.Both my posts on the subject were quite clear))joy

Here - Hendrik is using your statement about ISBN's to substantiate an attack on a book written mostly by my sifu. You are not jumping all over him at all like you are me, so I'm inferring you agree with him. (Wayfaring)

((I don't think that I "jump" on people. I agree, disagree or ignore specific posts. On crane and snake- Hendrik makes some plausible comments.Ditto on questions of tracing wing chun to a
original shaolin . He seems to be quite clear on Buddhist concepts when he talks about them.
I ignore his "songs".I am unconvinced on some of the claims of energy projection . I do not regard him as an authority on Ip man wing chun. He seems to have raised some legitimate questions about aspects of "history" in the book that you mention. I bought and read the book when it came out and then gave it away. Now Meng seems to have a somewhat different view,
So promotions go on... and are of little interest to me.I have never regarded Meng's place as a research institution. I don't know what flag he will fly tomorrow.

My primary interest is in doing good wing chun---where Ip man led the way- leaving behind some puzzles.While he taught many...he taught only a few in a sustained manner-but the "many" have gone off in different directions-causing a considerable mess in quality control in the present generation. So if your lineage book is important to you-I have no problem with that.
If Hendrik does his Yik Kam wing chun-I have no problem with that either.

BTW I don't wear my academic hat here and never have-though it is mentioned at times by others. I am just a person climbing one wng chun mountain-there are others- but the view is great.
There are supposedly wing chun people now who are into mma-ok with me if that helps them.
I did mma before wc when it was not called mma-but I find understanding wing chun approach to timing, distance, balance, speed, power, combinations, lines, angles, strategy and tactics
enough to keep me busy.Joy Chaudhuri))

Wayfaring

12-21-2010, 10:13 PM

On crane and snake- Hendrik makes some plausible comments.Ditto on questions of tracing wing chun to a
original shaolin . He seems to be quite clear on Buddhist concepts when he talks about them.

I agree ideas / comments are plausible - which is a much more realistic word than evidence or fact which I hear often. IMO to state more than it is plausible is a reach.

Snake/crane roots have some possibilities, and they are not mutually exclusive to a shaolin background either with the understanding that a lot of common roots were collaborative in the Ming dynasty between family kung fu teachings and shaolin training. Plausibility does not exclude that either IMO.

But pretty much anything before the red boats seems a lot sketchier to map out, and even in my lineage it's just oral tradition and nothing beyond.

IMO the whole shaolin deal in that book was heavily benny meng influence - included chi sim, etc. you kind of see that difference in the direction he's chosen - now a black flag indonesian wck type art is the real real shaolin. I don't think the shaolin side is so extremely important to my lineage even so there's nothing hugely offensive to saying it's hung gun biu's art. Of course I speak for myself and my understanding only don't know how others feel.

On the Buddhist concept stuff and Hendrik, I'm not a practicing Buddhist so I will defer to others. My observation is he's a little bit of an emotional mess though which I don't really observe that much of in your higher level or more practiced Buddhists I know. All the song lyrics, anger, attachment to snake energy, etc.

My primary interest is in doing good wing chun---where Ip man led the way- leaving behind some puzzles.While he taught many...he taught only a few in a sustained manner-but the "many" have gone off in different directions-causing a considerable mess in quality control in the present generation. So if your lineage book is important to you-I have no problem with that.
If Hendrik does his Yik Kam wing chun-I have no problem with that either.

I have interest in filling out the WCK layers in understanding and practice as well. I had a very basic foundation in Ip Man through Moy Yat lineage / teachings before we all transitioned over to HFY. With the lineage stuff I don't think that book is representative - it was a slice in time. But I'll leave it to my sifu to talk about what future projects may or may not be going on.

BTW I don't wear my academic hat here and never have-though it is mentioned at times by others. I am just a person climbing one wng chun mountain-there are others- but the view is great.

I agree with you on all that and am on a path myself, and don't bring my academics in either.

There are supposedly wing chun people now who are into mma-ok with me if that helps them.
I did mma before wc when it was not called mma-but I find understanding wing chun approach to timing, distance, balance, speed, power, combinations, lines, angles, strategy and tactics
enough to keep me busy.Joy Chaudhuri))
For me the mma stuff is more process of elimination - not starting a school and no interest in mediocre ebmas local, so train with better fighters wherever I can find them. Lately they are MT striking and wrestling / bjj ground. But the wc structure, facing, energy holds true so I guess I still have a little of the wc identity. To each their own mountain.

CFT

12-22-2010, 03:27 AM

Vajramusti

12-22-2010, 07:42 AM

Wayfaring

12-22-2010, 08:34 AM

I think all that Joy is saying is that even a published book may not have gone through rigorous academic review. So having an ISBN is no guarantee of veracity.

How much of "Complete Wing Chun" or "Mastering Kung Fu" is actually historically verifiable? Not much I would contend. Beyond a general proof read and removal of libelous comments there probably was no due diligence to track down every assertion to see if it could actually be verified.

And I'm saying the standard practice in the publishing world is to have copy editors who do general proof reads and clean up statements and content editors who sign off on content accuracy.

Now the degree of content checking may vary, but the fact that it happens is not in dispute - it's standard practice. And that fact alone makes published sources more reliable than statements on online forums.

CFT

12-22-2010, 08:41 AM

So what would content editors use as references to check against Wing Chun history?

Right, nothing! QED.

Wayfaring

12-22-2010, 10:20 AM

So what would content editors use as references to check against Wing Chun history?

Right, nothing! QED.

Other published works usually is what they do if there is no definitive source. There is not a great deal available as you point out. One book on the opera has a section on red boats, which mentions Cheung Ng. There are scarce other sources. Then it gets down to family artifacts, interviews, etc. The material is scarce. Yet we have whole history books written on ancient Indian societies such as the Anasazi constructed completely from pottery artifacts, dwellings, remains. Which is even less.

Look, Hendrik may have some legitimately formed opinions based upon research. But the way to act upon that is to go through the exercise of writing it out completely in a logical sense minus all the drama and song lyrics and going through the exercise of publishing something.

Or I guess the other option is like we see in this thread. Ad hominem attack the credentials of anyone questioning his conclusions, including published works. Make dubious claims and connections, then refer to them as "fact" and "evidence".

That's my only issue with the whole topic. There is plenty of space for multiple viewpoints on ancestry and lineage in WCK. The healthy approach is to take all with a grain of salt and realize that legend and oral tradition makes for good stories and who knows actually what % is real. Try and get the most out of what you are studying and cool it on the delusional viewpoints.

FongSung

12-22-2010, 12:10 PM

Hence the term "Legend" not "History" in my earlier post.

Hendrik

12-22-2010, 02:40 PM

Look, Hendrik may have some legitimately formed opinions based upon research. But the way to act upon that is to go through the exercise of writing it out completely in a logical sense minus all the drama and song lyrics and going through the exercise of publishing something.

Because my WCK is live, and I present live as it is as how I found them to be.

Live comes with sentiment, emotion, awareness,......etc

Like a new born baby, live exist without needs to be superficially dress up or social requirement.

Zen, Buddhism, Daoism all is about return to nature and lively like spring.

and Spring doesnt needs to be published it is coming even this is winter.

Some days when you are capable to go beyond the realm of thoughts then you can see my realm. before that you are totally right in that realm of thought.

So, the ultimate question is what is your WCK? a tool? that is perfectly ok with me. But mine is live itself thus mine is not subject to your mind set.

Zen is needed to go beyond the realm of thought to see the original face of life.

t_niehoff

12-22-2010, 03:13 PM

Because my WCK is live, and I present live as it is as how I found them to be.

Live comes with sentiment, emotion, awareness,......etc

Like a new born baby, live exist without needs to be superficially dress up or social requirement.

Zen, Buddhism, Daoism all is about return to nature and lively like spring.

and Spring doesnt needs to be published it is coming even this is winter.

Some days when you are capable to go beyond the realm of thoughts then you can see my realm. before that you are totally right in that realm of thought.

So, the ultimate question is what is your WCK? a tool? that is perfectly ok with me. But mine is live itself thus mine is not subject to your mind set.

Zen is needed to go beyond the realm of thought to see the original face of life.

No, WCK can only be live or alive when you are using it, i.e., fighting. It is the same with any martial art or any athletic activity. Your boxing is only alive when you are boxing, your surfing is only alive when you are surfing. If you are not DOING it, how can it be alive?

Your whole "realm of thought" nonsense is misplaced.

Hendrik

12-22-2010, 03:58 PM

No, WCK can only be live or alive when you are using it, i.e., fighting. It is the same with any martial art or any athletic activity. Your boxing is only alive when you are boxing, your surfing is only alive when you are surfing. If you are not DOING it, how can it be alive?

Your whole "realm of thought" nonsense is misplaced.

You are exactly right thinking within your "realm of thought".

Wayfaring

12-22-2010, 05:22 PM

Because my WCK is live, and I present live as it is as how I found them to be.

Live comes with sentiment, emotion, awareness,......etc

Like a new born baby, live exist without needs to be superficially dress up or social requirement.

Zen, Buddhism, Daoism all is about return to nature and lively like spring.

and Spring doesnt needs to be published it is coming even this is winter.

Some days when you are capable to go beyond the realm of thoughts then you can see my realm. before that you are totally right in that realm of thought.

So, the ultimate question is what is your WCK? a tool? that is perfectly ok with me. But mine is live itself thus mine is not subject to your mind set.

Zen is needed to go beyond the realm of thought to see the original face of life.

When a man tries to convince himself and others of his own enlightenment while not being enlightened, he leads himself in circles.

Describing your emotions as a "lively spring" and a higher form of Zen is like that.
The little anger responses, attachments, displays are not the 4 sublime states of metaa, karunaa, muditaa, upekhaa. Perhaps you should reflect upon refining your path.

But then again I'm not a Buddhist.

Hendrik

12-22-2010, 06:00 PM

When a man tries to convince himself and others of his own enlightenment while not being enlightened, he leads himself in circles.

Who talks about enlightement? have you enlightent yet? Do you know how?

Describing your emotions as a "lively spring" and a higher form of Zen is like that.

Who talks about higher form of Zen?

Emotion is a lively spring for every human beings because emotion is the expression of the lower three chakras.

Zen is balance of top three chakras with the lower three chakras via the heart chakra.

How could one practice Zen without acknowledge and value the lower three chakras?
Impossible.

The little anger responses, attachments, displays are not the 4 sublime states of metaa, karunaa, muditaa, upekhaa. Perhaps you should reflect upon refining your path.

Any healty baby can get angry, that is nature.

metaa, karunaa, muditaa, upekhaa are just a different description of love where all human naturally practice and capable of. When a child lovingly caress his loving pet that's it. There is nothing sublime at all.

Buddha himself speak of sila of not killing, does that means attachments?

Those who keep preaching Wing Chun Kuen is from Shao Lin and and the Shao Lin monk create WCK to anti or Kill the Qing with Zen is the true attachment to ignorant or and hatret; not mention it violates the buddha's teaching of Karuna. That is a fact of serious attachement and promoting an evil path according to Sila of no killing.

But then again I'm not a Buddhist.

Buddhist or not it doesnt matter. Spring can be called different name but spring is always spring.

Wayfaring

12-22-2010, 06:13 PM

Emotion is a lively spring for every human beings because emotion is the expression of the lower three chakras.

Zen is balance of top three chakras with the lower three chakras via the heart chakra.

How could one practice Zen without acknowledge and value the lower three chakras?
Impossible.

Any healty baby can get angry, that is nature.

When anger does possess a man;
He looks ugly; he lies in pain;
What benefit he may come by
He misconstrues as a mischance;
He loses property (through fines)
Because he has been working harm
Through acts of body and speech
By angry passion overwhelmed;
The wrath and rage that madden him
Gain him a name of ill-repute;
His fellows, relatives and kin
Will seek to shun him from afar;
And anger fathers misery:
This fury does so cloud the mind
Of man that he cannot discern
This fearful inner danger.
An angry man no meaning knows,
No angry man sees the Dhamma,
So wrapped in darkness, as if blind,
Is he whom anger dogs.

Someone a man in anger hurts;
But, when his anger is later spent
With difficulty or with ease,
He suffers as if seared by fire.
His look betrays the sulkiness
Of some dim smoky smoldering glow.
Whence may flare up an anger-blaze
That sets the world of men aflame.
He has no shame or conscience curb,
No kindly words come forth from him,
There is no island refuge for
The man whom anger dogs.

Such acts as will ensure remorse,
Such as are far from the true Dhamma:
It is of these that I would tell,
So harken to my words.

Anger makes man a parricide,
Anger makes him a matricide,
Anger can make him slay the saint
As he would kill the common man.
Nursed and reared by a mother's care,
He comes to look upon the world,
Yet the common man in anger kills
The being who gave him life.

No being but seeks his own self's good,
None dearer to him than himself,
Yet men in anger kill themselves,
Distraught for reasons manifold:
For crazed they stab themselves with daggers,
In desperation swallow poison,
Perish hanged by ropes, or fling
Themselves over a precipice.
Yet how their life-destroying acts
Bring death unto themselves as well,
That they cannot discern, and that
Is the ruin anger breeds.

This secret place, with anger's aid,
Is where mortality sets the snare.
To blot it out with discipline,
With vision, strength, and understanding,
To blot each fault out one by one,
The wise man should apply himself,
Training likewise in the true Dhamma;
"Let smoldering be far from us."
Then rid of wrath and free from anger,
And rid of lust and free from envy,
Tamed, and with anger left behind,
Taintless, they reach Nibbana.

- The Angutarra Nikaya

Those who keep preaching Wing Chun Kuen is from Shao Lin and and the Shao Lin monk create WCK to anti or Kill the Qing with Zen is the true attachment to ignorant or and hatret; not mention it violates the buddha's teaching of Karuna. That is a fact of serious attachement and promoting an evil path according to Sila of no killing.

You sound confused. I know of nobody who this describes, certainly none in my WCK family.

Hendrik

12-22-2010, 06:50 PM

When anger does possess a man;

- The Angutarra Nikaya

Classical case of living in the upper 3 chakras and trying to eliminate the lower 3 chakras.

Is it like trying to deny sexual desire. one cannot deny anger, because it is a part of human. it serves a purpose.

Even the Boddhisatva of Compassionate, Kannon has a angry face.
Fudo Myoo is an angry Buddha

http://www.buddhamuseum.com/fudo-myoo-bronze_90.html

Anger doesnt possess a man. man choose to hold on anger ignorantly.
Anger is a nature phenomenon all living being has.

You sound confused. I know of nobody who this describes, certainly none in my WCK family.

I just state a famous case in WCK world marketing and you are so fast to clarify yourself. are you confuse or am I confuse?

anerlich

12-22-2010, 07:08 PM

When a man tries to convince himself and others of his own enlightenment while not being enlightened, he leads himself in circles.

Who talks about enlightement? have you enlightent yet? Do you know how?

Enlightenment may be another illusory goal to mislead the impressionable.

The unenlightened can often correctly judge a charlatan or bullsh!t artist when they see one. Even dogs can sometimes do that.

If enlightenment is rare or difficult to attain, then the probabilities are that the majority of those who claim knowledge of it or how to reach it are con artists. Beware of such people.

I just state a famous case in WCK world marketing and you are so fast to clarify yourself. are you confuse or am I confuse?

Skip the emotional blackmail and baiting, you have the desire but not the talent.

Hendrik

12-22-2010, 07:19 PM

Enlightenment may be another illusory goal to mislead the impressionable.

The unenlightened can often correctly judge a charlatan or bullsh!t artist when they see one. Even dogs can sometimes do that.

If enlightenment is rare or difficult to attain, then the probabilities are that the majority of those who claim knowledge of it or how to reach it are con artists. Beware of such people.

Work on continuous to realize what one didnt realize and expanding instead of Enlightenment which who knows what it is.

Skip the emotional blackmail and baiting, you have the desire but not the talent.

man falling into his own trap that is one's own choice.

anerlich

12-22-2010, 09:04 PM

Work on continuous to realize what one didnt realize and expanding instead of Enlightenment which who knows what it is.

Follow your own advice, I think you're in greater need of it than I.

GlennR

12-22-2010, 09:09 PM

Follow your own advice, I think you're in greater need of it than I.

Andrew
Advice is something he only takes when it supports his own agenda.... and fans his pseuodo academic ego..........

Glenn

horserider

12-23-2010, 07:35 AM

horserider

12-23-2010, 07:48 AM

Hendrik

12-23-2010, 10:22 AM

For me I have always found it curious that Wing Chun, Chu/Chow gar(southern Mantis) and Bai mei also share an overall general creation story( martial Monk of some kind developed new advance system. All three appear in history around the same time, mid 1800's. All three have ties to same people(boat people) and same home area. All 3 share same general combat objectives and general concepts. All 3 have clear White crane as a base art that was modified,changed,added to merged with,improved.

Is it possible that an answer to history questions might be found in where all 3 arts come from?

Here is what I think.

1, The root of all these art seems to derivation from White crane of Fujian.
However, White crane got its art from Ming Military or the follower of Gen Qi Chi-Kuang who reform the Chinese military art and martial art. it is not from shao lin because if one check the history at that period of time where Gen Qi Chi-kuang reform Shao Lin is name for pole but not fist.

So, this type of technology is much more likely from Fan Tze instead of Shao Lin if one take a look at Fan Tze.

Thus, IMHO, the source of White Crane is not Shao LIn but Ming Military art which is using against the Japanese pirate invation successfully around the coast.

2, Chu gar southern mantis is said to be created by Dong Chan or painfull Zen a Ming Royal decendent who hide in Shao Lin temple, who group for anti qing, later return to layman life, and was tracking down by Qing. He belongs to a different group then the Hung Mun who fleet to Taiwan. passed away without achieve much.

Thus, in the Alta or Taiwan Hung Mun, there is White Crane of Fujian's ancestor but no Dong Chan.

3, Dong Chan is where the story of the Royal Ming decendent or the Anti Qing martial art creation in Shao LIn from. White Crane is a different story and travel different path which link direct to the military from the begining with people like Chen Cin Nan or Gen. Chen Chen-Kung of Taiwan. So these belong to different party. Thus, White Crane of fujian landed in Taiwan big time but Dong Chan's himself not.

4, There are creation from different era.

Ei. the 1630 the creation of White Crane era, and after that.

Chu Ga component of White Crane could be from White crane or Ming Left over Military personal direct if it was created in 1650;
or Chu Ga is actually a creation of other then Dong Chan using White Crane platform since White Crane dominate big part of southern china after 1680.

SLT the long set, IMHO, from my tracking is created around 1730, in Kui Lin by Miu Shun after meeting with the Hung Mun white crane person code name Ng Mui. this person is more likely to be the second generation of White Crane of fujian instead of Fang Chi-Niang herself. SLT uniqueness is the snake engine which is a Soft type of White Crane evolution compare with the Hard White Crane of 1700.

You can check what I post above with different TCMA history and chinese history.

t_niehoff

12-23-2010, 10:28 AM

Here is what I think.
The root of all these art seems to derivation from White crane of Fujian.

Or, the root of all these arts could be that they all use a similar method (approach) to fighting, and in doing so, develop similar tools.

Judo, shuai jiao, and Cornish wrestling are all forms of jacket grappling but with no shared history, yet all "look" very similar.

Hendrik

12-23-2010, 10:31 AM

Just checking into this thread again. After reading last 2 pages I am confused . Not sure what this thread is about anymore.

Seems to become about Mr. Hendrik. Why is a thread about history now a thread about Mr Hendrik person. Can you not discuss history and a message with out attacking a messenger.

If you do not agree with a history or a theory presented please give alternative so a discussion can be done. Attacking a person never leads to any progress. For progress must present alternative view and present what evidence you have to support your view. If no evidence just a belief that is ok to. religion is like that too. Just say its a belief but attacking others is counter productive.

In fact

It has been like that for past decade, I take it as some one wants me to shut up to cover up for their His-story for their own agenda. They will use anything and twisting any stories to put down or discredit me. that is the strategy of this group of people. do a search in this forum. the evidence is there.

If they really have anything solid to support them they will be presenting it long ago.
It is rediculus to use ISBN as a reference of Chinese TCMA history and facts.

Hendrik

12-23-2010, 10:34 AM

Or, the root of all these arts could be that they all use a similar method (approach) to fighting, and in doing so, develop similar tools.

Judo, shuai jiao, and Cornish wrestling are all forms of jacket grappling but with no shared history, yet all "look" very similar.

Terence,

You love to post your view these day without even read my post and understood.

Wayfaring

12-23-2010, 10:40 AM

Seems to become about Mr. Hendrik. Why is a thread about history now a thread about Mr Hendrik person. Can you not discuss history and a message with out attacking a messenger.

IMO this is because the pattern you see above between your post and my response continues to play out. There are opposing viewpoints posted to Mr. Hendrik, but rather than having a reasonable discussion about the points brought up, there is either the victim syndrome presented (everybody is trying to shut me up because I'm a messenger of truth against their false histories), or that people with different viewpoints just really don't understand him or what he's posting.

So to me this is a very clear example of the drama following Hendrik that he brings on himself and why my encouragement would be for him to remove himself from the drama and put some time in to developing his viewpoints and publishing them.

t_niehoff

12-23-2010, 11:06 AM

Terence,

You love to post your view these day without even read my post and understood.

Hendrik,

I read you post and understand your theory. That is a possibility.

However, you are much, much, much, much too in love with your theory.

You seem to be stuck on the idea that fighting methods can only derive from other fighting methods, and that these methods "genetically" pass on components -- your DNA analogy. Yes, that is possible. But these same components can be developed independently, can be altered (intentionally,accidentally, or mistakenly), may be more complex than you believe, etc.

In my view, fighting arts -- if the people are actually fighting as opposed to passing on theory -- derive, change and adapt along FUNCTIONAL lines.

Hendrik

12-23-2010, 11:30 AM

Hendrik,

I read you post and understand your theory. That is a possibility.

However, you are much, much, much, much too in love with your theory.

You seem to be stuck on the idea that fighting methods can only derive from other fighting methods, and that these methods "genetically" pass on components -- your DNA analogy. Yes, that is possible. But these same components can be developed independently, can be altered (intentionally,accidentally, or mistakenly), may be more complex than you believe, etc.

In my view, fighting arts -- if the people are actually fighting as opposed to passing on theory -- derive, change and adapt along FUNCTIONAL lines.

isnt it this thread is about history/mystery instead of MMA and MMA fighting?

LoneTiger108

12-23-2010, 12:10 PM

isnt it this thread is about history/mystery instead of MMA and MMA fighting?

Pure genius!

Hendrik

12-23-2010, 02:09 PM

For those who really interested in the history. if one do enough research into it. the following is my view.

at the 1600 era,

1, Hung Mun is just an underground Ming army organization lead by Ming General in Taiwan.

2, Shao Lin is not the real lead, the lead is Ming army. In Ming dynasty, there is Monk Solder, and there are a few different Shao LIn or Monk solder camp located in China.
In Qing, the emperor is using Lama instead of the chinese Monk solder. up to the point of the boxer rebellion the Qing's Lama Solder is burning the church of the westerners...etc. One could read about the Monk solder and the Lama's in Late Chan patriach Ven Hsu Yun's lecture note.

3, Shao lin is just an image the Hung Mun or the underground Ming army use to get symphaty or motivate the chinese people. The Shao lin monks disagree with it. Thus, there is a book called the secret martial art of Shao lin which clarify the non involvement of Shao lin because real Shao Lin is practicing Buddhism.

Thus, the so called invention of Shao lin WCK in that era doesnt make sense. Because the real guy who run the show is ex Ming Military. and these people already has their weapons which is the White Crane of Fujian. There is no need for WCK.

at 1700 era the SLT is created from an advance level Buddhist of Emei Goldern Peak combining the Buddhist internal technology with the White Crane of fujian concept.
The reason of creation unknown, however, it is not for mass production or activity that is clear. That is because SLT in order to get to advance level needs years of cultivation into silence and Qi. it is not a military type of art.

The reason I brought the Emei art and all these up for past decade because I am hoping someone in the future look into this direction. In this direction there are lots of indepth information which will contribute to one's liberation instead of a fight fight bang bang mentality. Emei technology is capable of transforming and transcending a person with its 9 level of attainment which as realized and practice by the founder. The scope is beyond martial art but fusing martial art and live into one piece and return the piece into the nature. That is true liberation which expand one's mind and body or transform a pupa to a butterfly.

that indepth mind/body/Qi technology seed in SLT is the ticket for WCK to evolve in the future un exhausted when the general TCMA part dry out. That is the live of SLT. without it SLT is just a dry form with limited meaning and power.
Missing this point will be shut oneself into a narrow dead prison.

I often qoute the following song when I wrote of SLT because what I am expressing is in the lyrics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibuYz2muVw0&feature=fvw
yes it is a final fantasy because when one walk out of the realm of thought life become the final fantasy. Perhaps that is what the story Miu Shun the creator trying to tell. it is beyond and much much bigger then fighting because it deal with life at every instant.

at 1850,

When the Opera actors start the uprising.

1, Shao LIn means the uprising people which basically the Hung Mun members. Some of them support their own localized group and some of them support the Taiping.
These are no longer ex Ming military supported but a large organization. From Canton to Fujian to Shang hai....etc.

2, WCK is just the art of the opera people. WCK divided into the art which using one long SLT form as core and other art such as Weng Chun today which has different southern TCMA such as CLF and Hung gar as core.

3, Lee Man-Mau is the lead at this time for all the opera people. There is no other one else for lead. Yik Kam is a member under Lee Man-Mau and a Hung Mun member as his salutation could be tracked to that era.

There is nothing mysterious but everything is pretty clear to me. IMHO. You can agree or not agree with me. I am here to share what I view.

Eric_H

12-23-2010, 03:38 PM

In the Yik Kam story here are the disputed items:

1. Wong Wa Bo wing chun existed at the same time and is a different format.
2. Other Wing Chun doesn't have the snake+crane "signature" that Yik Kam's does.
3. Other Wing Chun has SNT/CK/BJ forms and weapons, Yik Kam's does not.
4. Yik Kam has been reported to have studied arts additional to WCK and imported pieces of those arts into something he called "Yik Kam Siu Lien Tao" - Yik Kam's Drilling Method.

To me, this raises two questions: Why would Yik Kam call his art something other than Wing Chun unless he felt it significantly different to the WCK he had learned? And, why is it so unbelievable that a member of the red boats (martial arts melting pot) would combine several arts together?

Hendrik, you still refuse to answer questions and call what nonsense you spew out as "history" and "fact".

The "fact" is that you haven't answered one logical question about these "facts" and go on rants about ISBNs because they provide a higher level of credibility than endlessly posting stupid songs from the 1970's.

The "fact" is that Yik Kam was a small, girlish, weak man who played the females on the red boat plays. This is probably why you cling to it so much Hendrik, it gives you hope for your small, weak, girlish frame. This snake-slidey-history-mystery-argument has gone on to long - Yik Kam was WWB's b!tch, end of story :D

Vajramusti

12-23-2010, 04:23 PM

For those who really interested in the history. if one do enough research into it. the following is my view.

at the 1600 era,

1, Hung Mun is just an underground Ming army organization lead by Ming General in Taiwan.

2, Shao Lin is not the real lead, the lead is Ming army. In Ming dynasty, there is Monk Solder, and there are a few different Shao LIn or Monk solder camp located in China.
In Qing, the emperor is using Lama instead of the chinese Monk solder. up to the point of the boxer rebellion the Qing's Lama Solder is burning the church of the westerners...etc. One could read about the Monk solder and the Lama's in Late Chan patriach Ven Hsu Yun's lecture note.

((Interesting))

3, Shao lin is just an image the Hung Mun or the underground Ming army use to get symphaty or motivate the chinese people. The Shao lin monks disagree with it. Thus, there is a book called the secret martial art of Shao lin which clarify the non involvement of Shao lin because real Shao Lin is practicing Buddhism.

((Interesting))

Thus, the so called invention of Shao lin WCK in that era doesnt make sense. Because the real guy who run the show is ex Ming Military. and these people already has their weapons which is the White Crane of Fujian. There is no need for WCK.

(Interesting))

at 1700 era the SLT is created from an advance level Buddhist of Emei Goldern Peak combining the Buddhist internal technology with the White Crane of fujian concept.
The reason of creation unknown, however, it is not for mass production or activity that is clear. That is because SLT in order to get to advance level needs years of cultivation into silence and Qi. it is not a military type of art.

((Makes sense-WCK is more for individual de velopment rather than for training a massive army))

The reason I brought the Emei art and all these up for past decade because I am hoping someone in the future look into this direction. In this direction there are lots of indepth information which will contribute to one's liberation instead of a fight fight bang bang mentality. Emei technology is capable of transforming and transcending a person with its 9 level of attainment which as realized and practice by the founder. The scope is beyond martial art but fusing martial art and live into one piece and return the piece into the nature. That is true liberation which expand one's mind and body or transform a pupa to a butterfly.

((There is more to wing chun than fighting- though it is a devastating fighting art as well IMO))

that indepth mind/body/Qi technology seed in SLT is the ticket for WCK to evolve in the future un exhausted when the general TCMA part dry out. That is the live of SLT. without it SLT is just a dry form with limited meaning and power.
Missing this point will be shut oneself into a narrow dead prison.
((Interesting))

I often qoute the following song when I wrote of SLT because what I am expressing is in the lyrics.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibuYz2muVw0&feature=fvw
yes it is a final fantasy because when one walk out of the realm of thought life become the final fantasy. Perhaps that is what the story Miu Shun the creator trying to tell. it is beyond and much much bigger then fighting because it deal with life at every instant.

((I won't touch this!!))

at 1850,

When the Opera actors start the uprising.

1, Shao LIn means the uprising people which basically the Hung Mun members. Some of them support their own localized group and some of them support the Taiping.
These are no longer ex Ming military supported but a large organization. From Canton to Fujian to Shang hai....etc.

2, WCK is just the art of the opera people. WCK divided into the art which using one long SLT form as core and other art such as Weng Chun today which has different southern TCMA such as CLF and Hung gar as core.
((OK))

3, Lee Man-Mau is the lead at this time for all the opera people. There is no other one else for lead. Yik Kam is a member under Lee Man-Mau and a Hung Mun member as his salutation could be tracked to that era.

((I don't know Lee Man Mau even though you mention it many times))

There is nothing mysterious but everything is pretty clear to me. IMHO. You can agree or not agree with me. I am here to share what I view.

((You really should write it up for a journal- with editorial help--for a more civil discussion than what is possible here because of the nature of net conversations.
To me there are diferrent things that need to be sorted out piece by piece- the red boat history, fukien to emei-
synthesis, you version of wc, shaolin buddhist non violent monks v Lama and the use of shaolin as a rallying cry only... too many things are jammed together in forum posts.))

PS For what it's worth---an opinion--- whatever the distant past history--it's the imprint of leung Jan and Ip man that has really shaped contemporary good wing chun. beyond Leung Jan and his immediate teachers- it gets pretty speculative))

joy chaudhuri

KPM

12-23-2010, 06:06 PM

((You really should write it up for a journal- with editorial help--for a more civil discussion than what is possible here because of the nature of net conversations.
To me there are diferrent things that need to be sorted out piece by piece- the red boat history, fukien to emei-
synthesis, you version of wc, shaolin buddhist non violent monks v Lama and the use of shaolin as a rallying cry only... too many things are jammed together in forum posts.))

PS For what it's worth---an opinion--- whatever the distant past history--it's the imprint of leung Jan and Ip man that has really shaped contemporary good wing chun. beyond Leung Jan and his immediate teachers- it gets pretty speculative))

joy chaudhuri

I agree with Joy on both of his points! I've been hoping for a long time that you would get with someone that is good at written English (like Rene or Robert maybe?), organize your research/theories, and publish it in some kind of more permanent format than an internet forum. I also have to agree with the previous poster that said that publishing your ideas gives them more credibility. Having something out there in print gives others a chance to closely exam your research and ideas and to respond appropriately. This is much better then internet forum debates and arguments. You've done a lot of work in this area and you should get credit and recognition for it. Arguing with people in an internet forum is not the appropriate venue for that.

Hendrik

12-23-2010, 06:07 PM

The "fact" is that Yik Kam was a small, girlish, weak man who played the females on the red boat plays. This is probably why you cling to it so much Hendrik, it gives you hope for your small, weak, girlish frame. This snake-slidey-history-mystery-argument has gone on to long - Yik Kam was WWB's b!tch, end of story :D

Eric,

Which WCK lineage you belongs to? Tell us about your lineage and who is your sifu and let the WCK world know what kind of Wu De you have and your lineage past to you.

Hendrik

12-23-2010, 06:09 PM

I agree with Joy on both of his points! I've been hoping for a long time that you would get with someone that is good at written English (like Rene or Robert maybe?), organize your research/theories, and publish it in some kind of more permanent format than an internet forum. I also have to agree with the previous poster that said that publishing your ideas gives them more credibility. Having something out there in print gives others a chance to closely exam your research and ideas and to respond appropriately. This is much better then internet forum debates and arguments. You've done a lot of work in this area and you should get credit and recognition for it. Arguing with people in an internet forum is not the appropriate venue for that.

KPM, Joy,

Thanks!

We all get rush into our life and didnt get the time to do it.

Now with Theo could write more about the six directional force...etc to share, I am very please. and hope that you all understand me better. as for the Shock power or inch jin, as my post in the how to increase power thread, in internal TCMA such as Baji or Chen taiji... there are atleast 3 different types of momentum generation happen in the same time, thus it is complex stuffs, all of these could be anylize clearly because one needs a clear process to synthesis it. but writting it down in english is big job.

If you have anything concern the above you would like to ask me, go a head, I will take time to answer.

Merry Xmas.

KPM

12-23-2010, 06:33 PM

-----OK. I'll take a shot. I've tried to follow Hendrik's ideas on the history, but I'm sure I don't remember the details!

Erik wrote:
In the Yik Kam story here are the disputed items:

1. Wong Wa Bo wing chun existed at the same time and is a different format.

---And? So what? The Opera troupes were very "fluid" and "flexible." Why is it hard to believe that a group working together to formulate ideas and methods for a new fighting method might choose to practice what they come up with in different formats? I don't think WCK was the invention of any one person or one specific time. I think it developed over a period of time with contributions from several people. As it was developing, the people involved wouldn't necessarily do things in EXACTLY the same way. But from your comment further down, I take it that you agree with this. I don't recall that Hendrik ever DISAGREED with this idea. But I could be wrong! :eek:

2. Other Wing Chun doesn't have the snake+crane "signature" that Yik Kam's does.

---Again....so what? But Snake & Crane is not unique to Yik Kam WCK. Its possible that Yik Kam did his own research and chose to develop the emphasis more than his contemporaries and thus has more of a "signature", but all WCK has some Snake & Crane element to it from what I've seen. Do you have a Bong Sau and Fak Sau?.....Crane element. Do you have a Biu Ji?.....Snake element.

3. Other Wing Chun has SNT/CK/BJ forms and weapons, Yik Kam's does not.

---I've never seen Yik Kam WCK. But from what I've read, its one long form appears to be a combination of SNT/CK/BJ....or at least has all the elements that those three do. Yik Kam WCK is NOT just the SLT form that we know from Yip Man WCK. Yik Kam WCK would represent the red boat material taught in one long continuous exercise. Wong Wah Bo's WCK may have been the red boat material teaching the same thing in three shorter continuous exercises. The Ku Lo San Sik may be the red boat material taught as the individual techniques and concepts without putting them into a continuous exercise. But they are all three likely still the red boat WCK material.

4. Yik Kam has been reported to have studied arts additional to WCK and imported pieces of those arts into something he called "Yik Kam Siu Lien Tao" - Yik Kam's Drilling Method.

---Again...SO WHAT? Chan Wah Shun or his son did the same thing. Sum Nung did the same thing.

To me, this raises two questions: Why would Yik Kam call his art something other than Wing Chun unless he felt it significantly different to the WCK he had learned?

---Why did Yuen Kay Shan or his followers choose to call their WCK something "different?" Why did Sum Nung or his followers then choose to call their WCK something different? Maybe because Yuen Kay Shan felt it was significantly different that what he learned from either Dai Fai Min Kam or Fok Bo Chuen? Maybe because Sum Nung felt it was signfiicantly different from what he learned from Yuen Kay Shan? Again...SO WHAT? It was still WCK!

And, why is it so unbelievable that a member of the red boats (martial arts melting pot) would combine several arts together?

----Maybe I missed something. But I don't find it unbelievable at all. But Hendrik has never claimed that Yik Kam WCK was any kind of "original" WCK. I don't recall him ever saying that he didn't believe that the members of the red boats combined multiple things together. After all, he himself postulates that WCK is essentially the combination of Fujian White Crane and Emei Snake.

---So bottom line....I don't see any problems with the "Yik Kam story." At least not in the points that you bring up. I don't mean to put words in Hendrik's mouth, but I did want to see your points addressed. Maybe Hendrik will correct me if I am wrong.

Hendrik

12-23-2010, 07:25 PM

Thanks Keith,

As for the long form, YK WCK is not alone as in the following

In our passed down writings it is said Leung Yee Tai taught from shorter San Sik and Wong Wah Bo taught from one long form. Leung Jan learned from both. He worked with Wong Wah Bo to combine the teachings of his two Sifu. This resulted in the 3 forms as practiced today.

http://kungfumagazine.com/forum/showpost.php?p=1067547&postcount=8

as for the snake technology, from BJ to structure braking to inch Jin.... lot so things in WCK rely in those type of technology. One can call it any name one likes but it got to be there to do the job.

RB93SAAT

12-23-2010, 11:08 PM

hendrik, everytime someone who disagrees with your views. you have an emotional issue. you would start attacking other people's teachers and lineages instead of giving any answers to back up your rediculous claim such as 'wing chun came from o-mei and crane.' your actions speak louder than your words. you like to instigate and force your views on others, but you have no intentions to discuess or debate with anyone.

you preach mo duk to cover up your hypocritical behavior. you totally ignore peoples' questions and are only capable of a one sided speech. listening to your mo duk is like listening to tammie faye and jim baker preaching bible, total nonsense. if you said yik kam slt came from o-mei and crane instead of wing chun came from o-mei and crane, i don't think anyone would disagree with you. but wing chun is wing chun, o-mei is omei, ngo cho kun is ngo cho kun. that is a fact. your o-mei is a fantasy nothing more.

KPM

12-24-2010, 07:55 AM

Hendrik

12-24-2010, 08:39 AM

The Wing Chun legends and myths say that Ng Mui developed WCK after watching a fight between a snake and a crane. Why is it so hard to believe that this is a metaphor referring to the original foundation of WCK? To me, the story seems likely to be a "mythologizing" of the idea that the original developers of WCK combined major elements from a snake style and a crane style. Have you ever seen Fujian White Crane? There are so many similarities to WCK that it would be hard to argue against some kind of connection between the two arts! I've never seen Omei Snake, but evidently Hendrik has and he sees a connection to WCK there as well. So what is the issue with what Hendrik has said?

For Emei Connection,

Jim of Koolo who is connected to Koolo and senior FungChun; and Russell have both visited the gate keeper of Emei to find out what is the possibility of Emei connection

The following article is a part of the result. Take a look.

http://www.w1ng.com/mystery-of-the-snake-and-crane-emei-connection/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKASkDfmV9g

The one thing that Hendrik has done that has ticked a lot of people off is to say that WCK did NOT come from the Shaolin Temple. The reason this ticked people off has more to do with emotional responses than logical reasoning. But I think the evidence supports what he says. I guess a lot of WCK people like that nostalgic idea that their ancestors were once enlightened Shaolin Monks. :rolleyes:

By any standard, The person Miu Shun who create SLT is a highly cultivate in energy/spiritual realm. As we know Emei 12 zhuang could only be passed to one single person per generation in the Emei Ling Chi lineage of Buddhism before 1900. and with Miu Shun knows the emei 12 zhuang means he must be some body and very likely the head of the Emei ling chi lineage in 1700; who use the Miu Shun nick name so that his leaking of emei 12 zhuang into SLT without get caught in his time. eventhough the signature he left in SLT trace back to emei ling chi hundreds of years later.

This lineage actually fuse the Daoism and Buddism together. What happen is the founder White Cloud of Emei is a Daoist who practices the internal alchemy and later liberated by Buddhist sage, that transcent and transform him, after his attainment of the advance state, he founded this lineage, develop the Emei 12 Zhuang, and then write a cannon called the Lotus which contain internal training from Medicine, Healing, to ......etc Now is kept in the Beijing Museum China.

I am proud of being a WCner and has learn the Long Form of SLT. Because I know my Ancestors is indeed a some body in the Chinese internal art world. Such as the Taiji people like to Link themself to Chang San Feng the Daoist. If Chang San Feng represent Taiji Wu Dang MA then White Cloud representing Emei.

SLT link itself to White Cloud of Emei, one of the top cultivator and the author of Lotus Cannon in Beijing Museum. SLT is analogy to a piece of art by Leonardo Davinci. That is the Pride of WCK. it is like having a Ferarri. Many will love to dream to have this SLT type of art and connection. one could have all the internal technology to be access without have to steal from taiji or other internal art which is unrelated to WCK.

As for the Shao Lin monk, Ip Chun is the one who brought Cheong Ng the creator of Red Boat, Some others Brought up Yat Chun.....ect

See, all these are great, however, none of these so called shao lin monk has a martial art signature which is traceable. No one knows what type of martial art they practice, No one knows which shao lin they comes from to trace if indeed WCK type of signature could be found in the shao lin they comes from as mother art......

But, Emei, we know it is clear that the manual of WCK Biu Jee be it in the Set of SLT, CK, or BJ, or the Long SLT, that contain the snake signature, and that snake signature could be traced to Emei 12 Zhuang and Emei 12 Zhuang is the creation of White Cloud of Emei.

So, the bottom line is, the snake signature in TCMA is there and could be traced, the founder is legitimate could be tracked down from different history of China. These are real deal.

IMHO, I rather accept a real traceable and tracked able story then some ever changing fiction or taking different art as the source of SLT ;where today is from Cheung Ng, Tomorrow is from Chi Sim, the day after tomorrow is from Weng Chun hall, The day after tomorrow tomorrow is from Yat Chan. ... So what they create? with what? when ? where? how? no answer but name dropping. and if one check into the So called Weng Chun hall lineage, one could find the core based is CLF and Hung gar signature, not SLT based type of art and that is a fact.

And with the knowledge of the snake technology of Emei, I know and any one knows that it open up the body accord to the SLT practice. Or another words, if open up a wider paradigm for one, or put it in a simple term it makes your practice alive. Ask those who has experience using the snake technology and see if they regret or their SLT or other sets practice will never go back similar to after one a person get rich they dont want to go poor and passed the point of no return.

The following is what Theo said in other post on the snake enginee..

Thus in the SLT, there is no such thing as only the arm moving during the punch or any other motion as the entire body is moving. The momentum generated in each motion then is also recycled and reused so that one does not have to start and stop or get stuck at some instant.

now in order to feel the Awareness over the entire body, one needs to be able to open or activate the physical body to allow the sensing and awareness ability to extend throughout the body. just being physically loose and relaxed will not cause one to be aware of the 6D because you also need the silence. so the snake engine gives one the ability to handle the 6D at a very fine granularity, from the fingertip to the toes. one needs both 6D and the snake engine in order to handle momentum dynamically at any instant at any kind of contact. without the snake engine, one cannot handle all the detail down to the smallest level. without the 6D, one cannot know how to handle the momentum.

so the 6D gives one the knowledge of how to handle the momentum and the snake engine gives one the tools to handle it down to the small details. thus when the sets are performed this way, one becomes aware of the details of the momentum in each motion and how the entire body is involved. this will cause movement or momentum in the body thus making it alive.

Thus, in a conclusion, Emei connection is a link which is based on evidence and technology that fix naturally into SLT without any modification or explanation needed. Some might choose to believe and some not, that is totally fine with me for I am just to share the information and the benifit one could have using the snake technology.

for those who believe otherwise, my suggestion is for them to find a traceable and trackable evidence to present to WCners. there is no point to get emotional because at the end of the day it is a matter of could what you believe set you free.

For me, the Emei connection has set me and many free --- no one fuzziness when practice SLT sets and be able to make the SLT alive and flow... it is all about clarity in practice SLT like found an operating manual.

It is not about myth or promoting of a lineage or marketing. It is all about finding the right key so the Ferarri could be started and drive out of the museum for only then one really own it.

Do you own your SLT and it flows naturally with awareness and tranquil like music, or it is always " sifu says this has to do this way, that has to do that way, oh, should this be higher, lower..... how to power these.. what the heck is this means...?" those type of wasting time struggling instead of practicing.

if you struggle then I invite you to try the snake engine, you might love it.

t_niehoff

12-24-2010, 09:00 AM

isnt it this thread is about history/mystery instead of MMA and MMA fighting?

Yes, but you seem oblivious to the connection between MAs and fighting! LOL!

My point is that your "DNA" isn't passed on via lineage only (from person to person or art to art) -- the "DNA" relates to FUNCTION, to doing something in fighting -- if not, then it is complete bullsh1t (and many TMAs are nothing but bullsh1t).

I used judo, SJ, and cornish wrestling to illustrate that. Here you have three different MAs that share the same "DNA" but aren't connected (historically). How is that possible? It is because they are all doing jacket grappling, and in doing that, in finding what works in that method of fighting, they find that the same tools, mechanics, strategies, etc. work. This is because what does work is limited.

So, if you take several TCMAs and have them all try to use a similar method -- let's say controlling while striking the opponent -- guess what? They will develop a similar DNA.

Hendrik

12-24-2010, 09:31 AM

I know you must be bored in this Xmas day and wanting attention. hahaha

Yes, but you seem oblivious to the connection between MAs and fighting! LOL!

My point is that your "DNA" isn't passed on via lineage only (from person to person or art to art) -- the "DNA" relates to FUNCTION, to doing something in fighting -- if not, then it is complete bullsh1t (and many TMAs are nothing but bullsh1t).

I used judo, SJ, and cornish wrestling to illustrate that. Here you have three different MAs that share the same "DNA" but aren't connected (historically). How is that possible? It is because they are all doing jacket grappling, and in doing that, in finding what works in that method of fighting, they find that the same tools, mechanics, strategies, etc. work. This is because what does work is limited.

So, if you take several TCMAs and have them all try to use a similar method -- let's say controlling while striking the opponent -- guess what? They will develop a similar DNA.

Wayfaring

12-24-2010, 10:14 AM

LoneTiger108

12-24-2010, 12:22 PM

For Emei Connection,

Jim of Koolo who is connected to Koolo and senior FungChun; and Russell have both visited the gate keeper of Emei to find out what is the possibility of Emei connection

The following article is a part of the result. Take a look.

http://www.w1ng.com/mystery-of-the-snake-and-crane-emei-connection/

An interesting read which does shed light to some of my question Hendrik so thanks for posting.

What still intrigues me is that I have learnt and talked with my Sifu many similar subjects, as you have seen from some of my other posts, without being a part of the Yik Kam or Emei tradition.

I also still get the feeling that Grandmaster Fu Wei Zhong (again a Mandarin name!) was probably curious himself to see similarities with his Emei and the Wing Chun he saw, so it would be even more interesting for him to see some of the heigung sets I have seen in the Lee Shing family!

And like I said, if they work just as well and have no influence from Yik Kam, then what exactly did Lee Shing know? Is it not possible that these internal stuffs existed in other families and still do today?

Something to contemplate over the holidays...

Hendrik

12-24-2010, 01:42 PM

An interesting read which does shed light to some of my question Hendrik so thanks for posting.

What still intrigues me is that I have learnt and talked with my Sifu many similar subjects, as you have seen from some of my other posts, without being a part of the Yik Kam or Emei tradition.

I also still get the feeling that Grandmaster Fu Wei Zhong (again a Mandarin name!) was probably curious himself to see similarities with his Emei and the Wing Chun he saw, so it would be even more interesting for him to see some of the heigung sets I have seen in the Lee Shing family!

And like I said, if they work just as well and have no influence from Yik Kam, then what exactly did Lee Shing know? Is it not possible that these internal stuffs existed in other families and still do today?

Something to contemplate over the holidays...

The direction and lead have been sorted out and shared, anyone of the WCK lineage can go and doing the research and write a book from what they find if they like to.

t_niehoff

12-24-2010, 03:14 PM

I know you must be bored in this Xmas day and wanting attention. hahaha

Brilliant retort. But I must say that I didn't expect anything else. As I told you, you are too in love with your theory.

Hendrik

12-24-2010, 04:08 PM

Brilliant retort. But I must say that I didn't expect anything else. As I told you, you are too in love with your theory.

Do you know I go to church and pray to Chris and loving Santa with all my Zen practice?

hahaha you dont know me.

I dont have a theory but whatever I do if I decide to do it, I will do it fully, loving it deeply to complete it , and release it to set myself free.

As for the history of China, it is what it is, I love it or not, it is what it is. and sharing that is not too in love but similar to sharing the earth is round.

Eric_H

12-26-2010, 10:34 PM

Keith,

Thank you for giving actual responses instead of going off and crying about Mou Duk or trying to get the thread deleted. While I don't quite agree with everything you've written you seem like you actually want to discuss. That alone puts you leagues above crybaby Hendrik.

2. Other Wing Chun doesn't have the snake+crane "signature" that Yik Kam's does.

---Again....so what? But Snake & Crane is not unique to Yik Kam WCK. Its possible that Yik Kam did his own research and chose to develop the emphasis more than his contemporaries and thus has more of a "signature", but all WCK has some Snake & Crane element to it from what I've seen. Do you have a Bong Sau and Fak Sau?.....Crane element. Do you have a Biu Ji?.....Snake element.

I see what you are saying, but i don't see those tools as necessarily crane or snake driven specifically as ties to O-mei. We also have an "Eagle" bong sao - that doesn't mean that Wing Chun comes from Eagle Claw Kung Fu too.

Just because we CAN use the terms snake+crane it doesn't mean they relate exactly to the same snake + crane that Hendrik is talking about. There are many expressions of those two animals in different CMA. I wouldn't say the snake system Bagua I have learned in the past has anything in common with Wing Chun.

3. Other Wing Chun has SNT/CK/BJ forms and weapons, Yik Kam's does not.

---I've never seen Yik Kam WCK. But from what I've read, its one long form appears to be a combination of SNT/CK/BJ....or at least has all the elements that those three do. Yik Kam WCK is NOT just the SLT form that we know from Yip Man WCK. Yik Kam WCK would represent the red boat material taught in one long continuous exercise. Wong Wah Bo's WCK may have been the red boat material teaching the same thing in three shorter continuous exercises. The Ku Lo San Sik may be the red boat material taught as the individual techniques and concepts without putting them into a continuous exercise. But they are all three likely still the red boat WCK material.

Theres nothing wrong with what you've written except if WWB wing chun which did contain SNT/CK/BJ Dummy+Weapons existed at the same time (which as accurately as can be traced it did). The key point is in WHY the difference existed and WHY Yik Kam did not call his art Wing Chun!

If it was "Yik Kam Siu Lien Tao" then it contains what worked for yik kam- nothing else. That's why I say it might be good for Henrdik's smaller (girlish, lol) frame, Yik Kam was a small weaker guy.

----Maybe I missed something. But I don't find it unbelievable at all. But Hendrik has never claimed that Yik Kam WCK was any kind of "original" WCK. I don't recall him ever saying that he didn't believe that the members of the red boats combined multiple things together. After all, he himself postulates that WCK is essentially the combination of Fujian White Crane and Emei Snake.

Hendrik has for years gone on about the true essence, the DNA of short jing and how crane and snake are the mother art, yadda yadda yadda ad nauseum. In that way he HAS made lots of claims to be the only one to know the original WC.

There are 10+ years of posts to back that up, though you'd have to look under all his fake screen names to gather them all (phenix, yelllowpikachu, etc). And when he gets proven wrong he cries and "retires" from the forum only to pop back up like a bad rash 6 months later.

Honestly, if the guy showed an ounce of humility and only spoke for the Yik Kam branch, there'd never be an argument.

Hendrik

12-26-2010, 11:14 PM

Honestly, if the guy showed an ounce of humility and only spoke for the Yik Kam branch, there'd never be an argument.

Too bad, Snake and Crane signature shows up in YKS, Koo Lo, Ip Man, and other Lineages of WCK.

No one needs to speak for any banch but reveal the existance of the evidence in all legitimate WCK lineages which cannot be deny.

If your WCK is not among the above, that is your problem not others.

t_niehoff

12-27-2010, 05:43 AM

Too bad, Snake and Crane signature shows up in YKS, Koo Lo, Ip Man, and other Lineages of WCK.

No one needs to speak for any banch but reveal the existance of the evidence in all legitimate WCK lineages which cannot be deny.

If your WCK is not among the above, that is your problem not others.

Let's say that you are correct, that this "signature" appears in these lineages/branches of WCK. What does that mean?

You seem to argue that it is proof that WCK comes from a fusion of Emei and White Crane.

My point is that this "signature" may just be mechanics that pertains to doing certain things (and you need to use those specific mechanics to do it), that since all these branches are doing those things, that it is only natural they would develop similar mechanics or signature. Just like SJ, judo, and Cornish wrestling share the same "signature" but have no historical connection.

KPM

12-27-2010, 08:43 AM

Hi Erik!

Thank you for giving actual responses instead of going off and crying about Mou Duk or trying to get the thread deleted. While I don't quite agree with everything you've written you seem like you actually want to discuss.

---Yes. I get very frustrated with people who come to the forum, and then won't actually respond to questions they don't like and won't actually "discuss" a topic.

I see what you are saying, but i don't see those tools as necessarily crane or snake driven specifically as ties to O-mei. We also have an "Eagle" bong sao - that doesn't mean that Wing Chun comes from Eagle Claw Kung Fu too.

---I take the evidence of specific motions and techniques found in WCK in combination with the original "snake/crane" origination myth. If you have techniques and methods that can be recognizably classified as "snake-like" as well as others that are clearly "crane-like"....in combination with a very commonly repeated mythic story about WCK coming from watching a snake and crane in battle, then it doesn't take a huge leap of logic or faith to postulate that WCK was originally developed from the combination of a "snake-like" art and a "crane-like" art. I believe its called using "Occam's Razor." The simplest and most rational explanation is usually the best. :)

Just because we CAN use the terms snake+crane it doesn't mean they relate exactly to the same snake + crane that Hendrik is talking about. There are many expressions of those two animals in different CMA. I wouldn't say the snake system Bagua I have learned in the past has anything in common with Wing Chun.

----Another point in my thesis is the witness of Fukien White Crane. Have you ever seen Fukien White Crane? As I said before, the similarities are many and just seem too much to be coincidence. Again, this strongly supports the "crane" part of the origination theory. Hendrik says the same about Emei Snake. I've never seen Emei Snake, but I'm willing to take his word for it. There are so many similarities between White Crane and WCK, that it isn't at all hard for me to believe that WCK started as White Crane but then evolved as other elements were added....possibly some Snake elements? These may have been more subtle and less obvious than the Crane.

Theres nothing wrong with what you've written except if WWB wing chun which did contain SNT/CK/BJ Dummy+Weapons existed at the same time (which as accurately as can be traced it did). The key point is in WHY the difference existed and WHY Yik Kam did not call his art Wing Chun!

---Why did Leung Jan teach WCK as 3 sets in Foshan, but then as San Sik in Ku Lo Village? Who can really say? But it doesn't mean that he taught drastically different WCK in Foshan compared to Ku Lo. And just because WWB may have taught his WCK in a different format from Yik Kam doesn't mean that they were drastically different either.

If it was "Yik Kam Siu Lien Tao" then it contains what worked for yik kam- nothing else. That's why I say it might be good for Henrdik's smaller (girlish, lol) frame, Yik Kam was a small weaker guy.

----Does Yip Man's SLT contain only what works for him? Does Yuen Kay Shan's SLT contain only what works for him? Just because Yik Kam's name got attached to it means nothing. Why did he drop the "WCK" label and just call it "SLT"? Who can say? Maybe he thought it was a more accurate term since his version was one long form. But again, that doesn't mean it was drastically different from other people's WCK.

Hendrik has for years gone on about the true essence, the DNA of short jing and how crane and snake are the mother art, yadda yadda yadda ad nauseum. In that way he HAS made lots of claims to be the only one to know the original WC.

----Oh yeah! I've been around! I am very familiar with Hendrik's past posting habits. He has said that the mother art was a combination of crane and snake, but he never claimed that Yik Kam's art specifically was that "mother art." He may be guilty of believing that his version of WCK is the best out there....but then....aren't we all! ;)

Hendrik

12-27-2010, 08:45 AM

Let's say that you are correct, that this "signature" appears in these lineages/branches of WCK. What does that mean?

You seem to argue that it is proof that WCK comes from a fusion of Emei and White Crane.

My point is that this "signature" may just be mechanics that pertains to doing certain things (and you need to use those specific mechanics to do it), that since all these branches are doing those things, that it is only natural they would develop similar mechanics or signature. Just like SJ, judo, and Cornish wrestling share the same "signature" but have no historical connection.

when MAC OS X is found in a computer, one knows it got to be Apple derived.

Vajramusti

12-27-2010, 09:35 AM

when MAC OS X is found in a computer, one knows it got to be Apple derived.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The snake and crane theme appears in the Ng Mui/Yim Wing Chun stories... not just in the Yik Kam history or tradition.As in many kung fu stories they are likely to be metaphors- meaningful within a group- perhaps less meaningful to people outside of a group.

Hendrik has a well known preference of suggesting and having people find out things further
on their own by working on it. When you combine that with what he calls his "Chinglish".. it causes
additional communication difficulties. However despite the combination of hinting and "Chinglish"
Hendrik has repeatedly given his views over time. On the whole he seems to have been more targeted -than is the case of his targeting individuals.

I don't always agree with him. Sometimes his suggestions are already embedded in some lineages other than his own.. using different words.At other times- I find him insightful at times... because he has seriously worked at dealing with Chinese martial language and history issues.

Many top flight instructors emphasize sort of learning by doing- rather than elaborate chatting
with whoever is around. Chat lists create their own realities.
Most of the KFO forums IMO do not include much discussion by first rate practitioners of their arts... and can confuse beginners in various arts.

On the other hand - are net forums really for communication? When things get slow in other forums- the wing chun forium noise goes up... net addiction at work!

joy chaudhuri

t_niehoff

12-27-2010, 11:23 AM

when MAC OS X is found in a computer, one knows it got to be Apple derived.

Your analogy is false. As I said, the same "signature" is found in SJ, in judo, and in Cornish wrestling, three separate arts with no common historical links. Using your analogy, how would this be possible?

The "signature" (DNA) that you talk about isn't someone's unique invention, but body mechanics, and to do certain specific tasks, we need to use certain specific mechanics. There is no way around it. If you want to throw someone with your hip, for instance, regardless of your art, you are going to end up using the same mechanics. You have to. There is no way around it. Give people the same or similar tasks, and they will come up -- independently -- with the same or similar way of doing it. The mechanics of a hip throw isn't like MAC OS X or the recipe for Coca Cola (some unique invention).

So, when I see a hip throw in an art, it doesn't follow that the art in question must be derived from judo or SJ or Cornish wrestling. It could have developed independently -- just as judo, SJ and Cornish wrestling did!

Hendrik

12-27-2010, 11:27 AM

Your analogy is false. As I said, the same "signature" is found in SJ, in judo, and in Cornish wrestling, three separate arts with no common historical links. Using your analogy, how would this be possible?

The "signature" (DNA) that you talk about isn't someone's unique invention, but body mechanics, and to do certain specific tasks, we need to use certain specific mechanics. There is no way around it. If you want to throw someone with your hip, for instance, regardless of your art, you are going to end up using the same mechanics. You have to. There is no way around it. Give people the same or similar tasks, and they will come up -- independently -- with the same or similar way of doing it. The mechanics of a hip throw isn't like MAC OS X or the recipe for Coca Cola (some unique invention).

So, when I see a hip throw in an art, it doesn't follow that the art in question must be derived from judo or SJ or Cornish wrestling. It could have developed independently -- just as judo, SJ and Cornish wrestling did!

You dont even know what I am talking about.

Eric_H

12-27-2010, 11:48 AM

Keith,

You do make some good arguments, taking a closer look:

---I take the evidence of specific motions and techniques found in WCK in combination with the original "snake/crane" origination myth. If you have techniques and methods that can be recognizably classified as "snake-like" as well as others that are clearly "crane-like"....in combination with a very commonly repeated mythic story about WCK coming from watching a snake and crane in battle, then it doesn't take a huge leap of logic or faith to postulate that WCK was originally developed from the combination of a "snake-like" art and a "crane-like" art. I believe its called using "Occam's Razor." The simplest and most rational explanation is usually the best.

I see your point, but it ignores all the techniques in Wing Chun that are not snake or crane like. If I can say because it contains some stuff that contains snake or crane like movements it comes from crane and snake I can also say because there are pieces that do not have crane and snake movements it does not come from crane and snake. The pendulum swings both ways.

----Another point in my thesis is the witness of Fukien White Crane. Have you ever seen Fukien White Crane? As I said before, the similarities
are many and just seem too much to be coincidence. Again, this strongly supports the "crane" part of the origination theory. Hendrik says the same about
Emei Snake. I've never seen Emei Snake, but I'm willing to take his word for it. There are so many similarities between White Crane and WCK, that it
isn't at all hard for me to believe that WCK started as White Crane but then evolved as other elements were added....possibly some Snake elements?
These may have been more subtle and less obvious than the Crane.

I've seen a few white crane systems, we have a tosian school here in town. As an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkwdiPpxgCc

Honestly, it looks more like Weng Chun than Wing Chun. All southern CMAs share a common signature, but the specifics of WC (50/50 weight, centerline, etc) aren't in the others - white crane included.

---Why did Leung Jan teach WCK as 3 sets in Foshan, but then as San Sik in Ku Lo Village? Who can really say? But it doesn't mean that he taught
drastically different WCK in Foshan compared to Ku Lo. And just because WWB may have taught his WCK in a different format from Yik Kam doesn't
mean that they were drastically different either.

We always have the TWC origin story as an explanation for Leung Jan's way of doing things. FWIW, I buy that he passed they WCK "system" on to a few and then gave the rest what they needed for fighting, this has been the way of Kung Fu teachers for hundreds of years.

----Does Yip Man's SLT contain only what works for him? Does Yuen Kay Shan's SLT contain only what works for him? Just because Yik Kam's
name got attached to it means nothing. Why did he drop the "WCK" label and just call it "SLT"? Who can say? Maybe he thought it was a more accurate
term since his version was one long form. But again, that doesn't mean it was drastically different from other people's WCK.

To go out on a limb here - I'd say yes. All the students of YM have different looking SNT. He gave them what they needed within the parameters of the WC system and customized to their body type etc. Who is to say he didn't get the same treatment from Chun Wa Shun and then learned the system part from Leung Bik?

----Oh yeah! I've been around! I am very familiar with Hendrik's past posting habits. He has said that the mother art was a combination of crane and snake,
but he never claimed that Yik Kam's art specifically was that "mother art." He may be guilty of believing that his version of WCK is the best out
there....but then....aren't we all!

Yeah he has yet to outright say it, but basically here's how the Hendrik robot works:

1. Talk about some ridiculous DNA/microcasm/extra extrapolated theory
2. When challenged deflects to crane and snake being the origin and how he understands "legitimate WCK" and you don't.
3. Quote some song from the 1970s for no reason.
4. When disagreed with, provides no evidence and runs away from the conversation saying "thank you" or "ignores" you
5. Talks about people being attached or having issues if pressed further
6. When no arguments are left, delete the thread, go back to step 1.

For anyone that reads RSF: It makes me Tire.

t_niehoff

12-27-2010, 11:54 AM

Many top flight instructors emphasize sort of learning by doing- rather than elaborate chatting
with whoever is around. Chat lists create their own realities.
Most of the KFO forums IMO do not include much discussion by first rate practitioners of their arts... and can confuse beginners in various arts.

What is your criteria for determining what makes a "top flight instructor" and a "first rate practitioner" of WCK?

KPM

12-27-2010, 11:59 AM

Hey Eric!

I see your point, but it ignores all the techniques in Wing Chun that are not snake or crane like.

---WCK evolved from its roots and underwent changes. Heck....even Fukien White Crane has techniques that one could say don't look very "crane-like." That doesn't disprove the theory.

Honestly, it looks more like Weng Chun than Wing Chun. All southern CMAs share a common signature, but the specifics of WC (50/50 weight, centerline, etc) aren't in the others - white crane included.

---You need to check out Fukien White Crane....it does have 50/50 weight distro and a centerline theory!!! They even have Chi Sau, though of course not the "Luk Sao" version developed by Yuen Kay Shan and Yip Man.

We always have the TWC origin story as an explanation for Leung Jan's way of doing things.

----How does the TWC origin story have any bearing on what we are discussing?

To go out on a limb here - I'd say yes. All the students of YM have different looking SNT. He gave them what they needed within the parameters of the WC system and customized to their body type etc. Who is to say he didn't get the same treatment from Chun Wa Shun and then learned the system part from Leung Bik?

---And again....all of those people that learned SLT from Yip Man or from Yuen Kay Shan, even if some adaptations were made for them personally, are still recognized as doing WCK. The changes weren't drastic enough to declare it another art. Just because Yik Kam changed the name doesn't necessarily mean what he was doing was drastically different from the other WCK guys.

Yeah he has yet to outright say it, but basically here's how the Hendrik robot works:

----I can't argue with that! :) Fortunately he seems to be a little more forthcoming in his more recent posting than he was in the past. I do see an improvement!

t_niehoff

12-27-2010, 12:04 PM

I see your point, but it ignores all the techniques in Wing Chun that are not snake or crane like. If I can say because it contains some stuff that contains snake or crane like movements it comes from crane and snake I can also say because there are pieces that do not have crane and snake movements it does not come from crane and snake. The pendulum swings both ways.

I don't think it is a matter of various techniques have snake or crane-like movements but rather that the mechanics and tactics "unique" to Emai and White Crane have been adopted into WCK.

I've seen a few white crane systems, we have a tosian school here in town. As an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkwdiPpxgCc

Honestly, it looks more like Weng Chun than Wing Chun. All southern CMAs share a common signature, but the specifics of WC (50/50 weight, centerline, etc) aren't in the others - white crane included.

That I think is the major flaw in Hendrik's theory -- that these things are unique to ONLY White Crane and Emei.

We always have the TWC origin story as an explanation for Leung Jan's way of doing things.

That story is complete nonsense (and Cheung took the story from tai ji!).

FWIW, I buy that he passed they WCK "system" on to a few and then gave the rest what they needed for fighting, this has been the way of Kung Fu teachers for hundreds of years.

That may be a part of it. The other part is that what these people are teaching is only the curriculum of WCK. They don't teach you how to use it. You only learn to use it by using it. When Rene asked Sum Nung what that major difference was between today's practitioners and those of the past, Sum said, "In the past, they fought a lot." It was through fighting that they developed their skill and understanding of the art.

To go out on a limb here - I'd say yes. All the students of YM have different looking SNT. He gave them what they needed within the parameters of the WC system and customized to their body type etc. Who is to say he didn't get the same treatment from Chun Wa Shun and then learned the system part from Leung Bik?

No.

Yeah he has yet to outright say it, but basically here's how the Hendrik robot works:

1. Talk about some ridiculous DNA/microcasm/extra extrapolated theory
2. When challenged deflects to crane and snake being the origin and how he understands "legitimate WCK" and you don't.
3. Quote some song from the 1970s for no reason.
4. When disagreed with, provides no evidence and runs away from the conversation saying "thank you" or "ignores" you
5. Talks about people being attached or having issues if pressed further
6. When no arguments are left, delete the thread, go back to step 1.

For anyone that reads RSF: It makes me Tire.

LOL!

KPM

12-27-2010, 12:08 PM

Hendrik

12-27-2010, 12:11 PM

That I think is the major flaw in Hendrik's theory -- that these things are unique to ONLY White Crane and Emei.

Similar to MAC OS if not from Apple computer.

Sure, find and propose where else one could find those type of technology in past 400 years of Chinese TCMA history.

Go a head, find it share the details of application uniqueness and power generation of such a style.

Until then, Thinking is cheap. I can think MAC OS is not unique too.

Eric_H

12-27-2010, 12:33 PM

Keith,

---WCK evolved from its roots and underwent changes. Heck....even Fukien White Crane has techniques that one could say don't look very "crane-like."
That doesn't disprove the theory.

Aye, but it doesn't prove it either ;)

---You need to check out Fukien White Crane....it does have 50/50 weight distro and a centerline theory!!!
They even have Chi Sau, though of course not the "Luk Sao" version developed by Yuen Kay Shan and Yip Man.

They do have centerline, but not in the same sense as WC. They give up their 50/50 weight for the signature crane stance. I'd argue that without a steady weight distrobution you can't have a good "self" centerline (part of the WC signature). Heck, Thai Boxing, SPM, Tai Chi and Bak mei all have 50/50 weight and centerline too, its in how you define and use centerline that makes the difference.

IF White Crane was the origin, what was so deficient in it that they needed to make Wing Chun?

----How does the TWC origin story have any bearing on what we are discussing?

We were discussing the reason for changes in LJ's teaching, the TWC story points out a reason for changes in what Leung Jan did.

---And again....all of those people that learned SLT from Yip Man or from Yuen Kay Shan, even if some adaptations were made for them personally,
are still recognized as doing WCK. The changes weren't drastic enough to declare it another art. Just because Yik Kam changed the name doesn't necessarily
mean what he was doing was drastically different from the other WCK guys.

There's the rub though - Yik Kam included outside elements from O-mei. That's a fact. Once you as a teacher make a significant change like that its no longer WCK, for as much as I tend to poke fun, that's a credible kung fu guy thing to do - if you change it, take credit for it (and the lumps that come with it). That's how we end up with things like "Fu Style" "Yang Style" "Chu Sau Lei WC" (all of which are good systems) and beyond. If tomorrow I decided to combine 5 ancestor boxing or Baiji with Wing Chun would it still be wing chun? No, it'd be the combination of those elements and henceforth be known as Eric's kung fu style. I think Yik Kam was honorable enough (being a secret society member usually requires that) to say, "i made these changes per what i understand, this is my system."

At the end of the day though, we're arguing about what some Tranny might or might not have taught in China 200 years ago. Maybe we should find better uses for our time ;)

Eric_H

12-27-2010, 12:48 PM

---Sorry, I didn't actually watch your clip until after I replied.

I've seen a few white crane systems, we have a tosian school here in town. As an example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkwdiPpxgCc

---But Dude!!!! You don't see the WCK similarities in that clip??!! :confused: Squared-on facing, Tan Sau, Gan Sau, centerline structure, the foot work, etc.???
They even show Chi Sao! Sure, it also looks like Weng Chun, because it also shares similarities and attributes to WCK and may have had a similar root but different evolution. WCK has evolved! Imagine taking a Fukien White Crane foundation similar to what you see in that clip and allowing it to evolve and change as you figure out what works well and what doesn't under the pressure of being a fighting revolutionary on the red boats with a price on your head. Or imagine taking that Fukien White Crane foundation and training with someone that does a Snake style that is able to frustrate you. Maybe you'd start adapting and changing and even incorporating some things from that Snake style?

Keith,

No worries :)

And I'd agree there are possibilities that what White Crane does influences pieces of WCK or arts that became WCK. It is also possible that White Crane was the first "southern" art and thats where the connection ends. Or that there is no connection at all. But to say crane and snake directly made WCK? That's too much of a stretch for me. I'm more inclined to agree with Terrence (will wonders never cease?) that there are simply limited ways your body can do certain things, and if they work they'll pop up over and over again in different places.

The Key is in the differences, thats what needs to be rooted out. We can't do that by looking at the stuff that shows up in a large number of systems (like bong sao, tan sao, gan sao, they're in every southern CMA!)

t_niehoff

12-27-2010, 12:52 PM

Similar to MAC OS if not from Apple computer.

Sure, find and propose where else one could find those type of technology in past 400 years of Chinese TCMA history.

Go a head, find it share the details of application uniqueness and power generation of such a style.

Until then, Thinking is cheap. I can think MAC OS is not unique too.

If you want to have very good short power (to be able to generate much power from a short distance), how many ways -- different mechanics -- do you think you can use to do that?

If I ask you to throw a small ball as far as you can, what mechanics will you use? Do you think there are all kinds of ways of doing that? No. In fact, everyone if they take a bit of time practicing trying to do it will ALL develop the same basic mechanics.

That is what I am trying to point out: in performing tasks that require maximum potential (power, speed, etc.) is very limited in variation. In other words, given the same task, we will all over time develop the same ways of doing it because there is an optimal way of doing that task.

Your snake/crane ways of moving are just a way or describe something that is not unique but is common to performing a task.

Hendrik

12-27-2010, 01:18 PM

If you want to have very good short power (to be able to generate much power from a short distance), how many ways -- different mechanics -- do you think you can use to do that?

If I ask you to throw a small ball as far as you can, what mechanics will you use? Do you think there are all kinds of ways of doing that? No. In fact, everyone if they take a bit of time practicing trying to do it will ALL develop the same basic mechanics.

That is what I am trying to point out: in performing tasks that require maximum potential (power, speed, etc.) is very limited in variation. In other words, given the same task, we will all over time develop the same ways of doing it because there is an optimal way of doing that task.

Your snake/crane ways of moving are just a way or describe something that is not unique but is common to performing a task.

Sorry to not interest in your "if" and thinking ....etc. if you have something present it. if you dont, then you dont.

Hendrik

12-27-2010, 01:20 PM

Vajramusti

12-27-2010, 02:01 PM

Vajramusti

12-27-2010, 02:06 PM

Hendrik

12-27-2010, 02:13 PM

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Differences in starting points pf POV - but I understand the above. ..both on the center line and
that biu jee is the last to finally develop.

Development and application is confused a lot... without proper development- a full understanding of application is not easy.

joy chaudhuri

Joy,

Agree.

The Crane and Snake design in makes 3.3 related in WCK possible. either we admit it or not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4eWIAYvf9Q

Vajramusti

12-27-2010, 03:08 PM

Joy,

Agree.

The Crane and Snake design in makes 3.3 related in WCK possible. either we admit it or not.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4eWIAYvf9Q
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seriously Hendrik that video narration on differences in biu jee seems to confuse devlopment with application... and not quite the same to what I had in mind... and a good reason why I dont pay too much attention to You.tube... demos, explanations or wikipedia.

joy chaudhuri

Hendrik

12-27-2010, 03:13 PM

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Seriously Hendrik that video narration on differences in biu jee seems to confuse devlopment with application... and not quite the same to what I had in mind... and a good reason why I dont pay too much attention to You.tube... demos, explanations or wikipedia.

joy chaudhuri

Joy,

You have a great point on development and application. That is true.

You need to share your view to enrich the everyone.

Vajramusti

12-27-2010, 03:34 PM

Joy,

You have a great point on development and application. That is true.

You need to share your view to enrich the everyone.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Difficult to do. On so many issues there is the relevance of the old Indian fable of blind men defining the elephant- subjective interpretation of limited empiricism.

For development when you face your own mirror image (shadow)there is one basic flying elbow. When you apply it against a bag or a real person there cam be different applications of that flying elbow... depending on the structure that you face.
Ignoring CONTEXT can give you fuzzy epistemology.

joy chaudhuri

Hendrik

12-27-2010, 03:36 PM

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Difficult to do. On so many issues there is the relevance of the old Indian fable of blind men defining the elephant- subjective interpretation of limited empiricism.

For development when you face your own mirror image (shadow)there is one basic flying elbow. When you apply it against a bag or a real person there cam be different applications of that flying elbow... depending on the structure that you face.
Ignoring CONTEXT can give you fuzzy epistemology.

joy chaudhuri

True!

Thanks for your sharing.

PalmStriker

12-27-2010, 06:26 PM

Just wanted to take another look at some of WC's history (and mystery) sparked from another thread.

Originally posted on recent thread:

Thank you for sharing this information. While not everyone believes the Yim Wing Chun legend, it is clear that WC has been around before the time of Wong Wah Bo and then clearly before Yik Kam as listed in the tree above (even if WWB isn't listed in this tree). Curious if you've heard of Leung Lan Kwai learning from Leung Bak So who in turn taught Wong Wah Bo?
Anyway, the reason I bring up WWB is because of the big differences I see between just about everyone that comes down from his teachings and those few lines that come from from Yik Kam.

Why is it all the lines that come down from Wong Wah Bo's teachings have 3 hand forms while his juniors wing chun (Yik Kam) only has one long SLT?

It has been said on this forum that Yik Kam (or his teacher) is the creator of Wing Chun with it's single SLT form and mixture of Omei and White Crane, and that it is the 'original' WCK coming from Omei-Crane. It would also be believed that this one SLT was then later split into SNT/CK/BJ as we have today (in both WWB descendants and several non-WWB lineages).
Also, how can most all other lines that draw down from Yim Wing Chun, or even Wong Wah Bo (Yik Kam's senior) already have 3 hand forms and none (or very little) of the strong Omei and White Crane signatures seen only in YK's 1 SLT today if it is the original?? Also, if it is true that YK's 'original' 1 slt was split into 3 forms, why is it still 1 from in YK WCK today?

This tells me that the 1 long SLT was YK's invention after training some WC, along with the mixing in of the omei/crane information. and that is why it is still 1 long form today as opposed to the traditional 3 the rest of the WC community has that traces their lineage past YK. (except for Gulo's point system)

Which lineage remained in Mainland China and only taught in secrecy as late as the early 1980's? There were "family" members of this lineage living in Hong Kong at that time and referred to Ip Mun lineage as "Hong Kong style" Wingchun. Anyone know who they were? Thanks for any information.

KPM

12-28-2010, 11:26 AM

Which lineage remained in Mainland China and only taught in secrecy as late as the early 1980's? There were "family" members of this lineage living in Hong Kong at that time and referred to Ip Mun lineage as "Hong Kong style" Wingchun. Anyone know who they were? Thanks for any information.

Yuen Kay Shan/Sum Nung WCK possibly?

KPM

12-28-2010, 11:39 AM

Hey Eric!

Aye, but it doesn't prove it either ;)

---But it does make the theory more plausible. And that's all we can talk about here....theories.

IF White Crane was the origin, what was so deficient in it that they needed to make Wing Chun?

---Who can say? WCK was the origin of JKD. What did Bruce Lee find so deficient about WCK that he needed to create JKD? A WCK guy would likely say there is nothing deficient in WCK that needs changing.....the same thing would likely be said by a White Crane guy. Its all in the eye of the beholder! :)

We were discussing the reason for changes in LJ's teaching, the TWC story points out a reason for changes in what Leung Jan did.

----The TWC legend (which I find very questionable) says that LJ taught two different versions of WCK. He didn't just teach the same material in two different formats.....SLT/CK/BJ vs. San Sik.

There's the rub though - Yik Kam included outside elements from O-mei. That's a fact. Once you as a teacher make a significant change like that its no longer WCK

---I disagree. Yip Man's teacher Chan Wah Shun's lineage still continues through Chan's son. Yet it contains a lot more than the typical SLT/CK/BJ, Dummy, Pole and Knifes. Someone added a lot a material in somewhere! And it is still called WCK. Pan Nam combined elements of Hung Ga and other styles into his version, which is still called WCK.

, that's a credible kung fu guy thing to do - if you change it, take credit for it (and the lumps that come with it).

---Again, I have to disagree! From what I've seen, the "traditional chinese" thing to do is to make changes as you see fit and then attribute it to some ancestor to give it an air of authenticity. In the West we like to see "new and improved", but in the East they have liked to see "old and traditional."

I think Yik Kam was honorable enough (being a secret society member usually requires that) to say, "i made these changes per what i understand, this is my system."

---Even if he did, if it still contained the core elements of WCK, it would still be a version of WCK!

At the end of the day though, we're arguing about what some Tranny might or might not have taught in China 200 years ago. Maybe we should find better uses for our time ;)

----I agree! ;) These are just historical theories and conjecturing. I find the evidence to support the basic idea that WCK evolved from elements of a crane and a snake style. But you don't and that's fine! To each his own! I had originally posted in this thread just to show that Hendrik's ideas are not as "out there" as you seemed to think. He hasn't said that YiK Kam WCK was the "original mother art."

Hendrik

12-28-2010, 01:00 PM

IF White Crane was the origin, what was so deficient in it that they needed to make Wing Chun?

---Who can say? WCK was the origin of JKD. What did Bruce Lee find so deficient about WCK that he needed to create JKD? A WCK guy would likely say there is nothing deficient in WCK that needs changing.....the same thing would likely be said by a White Crane guy. Its all in the eye of the beholder! :)

Turn the time back to 1700, White Crane at that time is closer to today's Karate or Okinawate. rigid, hard, and very hash. It is known as a hard solid no nonsense art.

Miu Shun, who is an expert in internal art knows the White Crane's center line theory and simultaneous hands move are superior but the power generation could be improved, also without a strong body, there is no way to practice White Crane to have good result.

So, that is how SLT is created. a White Crane which is much more agile and adaptive, with more efficient power generation and more suitable to ordinary folks since it doenst demand strong body to begin with.

Late, 1700, White Crane take another evolution, Soft was introduce into White Crane and different branchs of White Crane surface in 1800.

This is consider the later day or post 1800 evolution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NKROC5mS1c

however, always notice White Crane even after the evolution as Sifu Lee Kong above never really handle the first few joints of their fingers as details as WCK, they handle is like a "brush" different then as in

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5cqRp-YtuM&feature=related

and 0.39 using of the Emei 12 Zhuang's signature "the five fingers trace the taiji" this five fingers trace the taiji move is a training in additional to the Biu jee to open up energy channel to the tip of the fingers. So, in SLT all has this move because this is how it works the energy up to the finger tips and every fingers.

it is in this making the fist by closing fingers one by one which leads the three hand's yang medirian's qi to flow from finger tips to one's head during inhale. and lead the three hand's ying medirian's qi from the chest to the finger tips during exhale while performing a Biu Jee. That is how the design on energy flow is if one is train and could access to the Qi flow layer of training.

That is what it means by the Yik Kam Kuen kuit when it says " spontaneously accord to the Qi medirians" the physical technics, the breathing, and the flow of the Qi are sponataneously nature.

VTM makes a nice try on proposing HKM as the original of WCK, however what they missed in the WCK's signature where the practice goes as far as the fingers as the above; instead of the above White Crane type where training but not the handling of the fingers joints. The soft of Wing Chun comes from the multiple joints handling in the fingers instead of threating the what ever after the palm as one piece.

Thus, with the signature show in HKM, at the most is a 1800's creation and that is fit Ngo Cho is a creation of 1850 with White Crane influence.

BTW. NO SHAO LIN doesnt not has those type of finger handling technics, The shao lin has the Varja finger or one finger Zen but those are hard training. So, using the fingers signature one sure can track lots of things.

and in this case, GM Fung Chun got nothing to do with YK SLT but he did one of the essence of Yik Kam SLT. That said something about WCK isnt it?

There's the rub though - Yik Kam included outside elements from O-mei. That's a fact. Once you as a teacher make a significant change like that its no longer WCK

---I disagree. Yip Man's teacher Chan Wah Shun's lineage still continues through Chan's son. Yet it contains a lot more than the typical SLT/CK/BJ, Dummy, Pole and Knifes. Someone added a lot a material in somewhere! And it is still called WCK. Pan Nam combined elements of Hung Ga and other styles into his version, which is still called WCK.

Yik Kam got nothing todo with Emei embedding in SLT. without Emei, there will be no SLT. The reason is as above. IMHO

At the end of the day though, we're arguing about what some Tranny might or might not have taught in China 200 years ago. Maybe we should find better uses for our time ;)

----I agree! ;) These are just historical theories and conjecturing. I find the evidence to support the basic idea that WCK evolved from elements of a crane and a snake style. But you don't and that's fine! To each his own! I had originally posted in this thread just to show that Hendrik's ideas are not as "out there" as you seemed to think. He hasn't said that YiK Kam WCK was the "original mother art."

I have never say Yik Kam WCK was the original mother art. What I do said is YIK Kam WCK and all the older WCK art such as the one practice by Fung Family direct from LJ share the same essential signature.

and one cant deny Emei is in WCK be it with or without the SLT or with long form or 3 sets. It is a facts cannot be deny if one needs to activate the WCK fully.

Seriously, with all the evidence, I dont think there is a case to deny Emei's technology in WCK. sure people will resist because the finding might be contradict to their lineage legend told to them. But that resistance will not last, may be 10 years? 20 years? and accept it finally because one cant resist facture evidence.

one thing for sure is that is, not to make anyone wrong. the matter of facts every legend could get distorted in the old time where no proper record is done.

As for the above, if one likes to take out the part of five finger trace taiji as perform by GM Fung that is fine, but your training will not be complete in the fingers joints area.

Finally, even via YIK Kam's kuen kuit and long form 108 SLT which lead one to trace and track down the above, that still doesnt said Yik Kam WCK is the oldest or superior...etc. It just said, we are lucking to have this material to help us track down the trace. That is the credit of Cho family who preserve the artifact to make it possible for tracing research.

with the above lead,
One can do research and write book and books on these stuff or even making big drama movies out of these stuffs or go hollywood, that is you energetic and creative WCners job, I am too old for these..

Certainly, anyone who is a head of its time telling the finding will never win popularity contest and often get mis-understood, But what the heck. if it is my job then so be it. different people contribute thing in a big WCK family.

KPM

12-28-2010, 07:15 PM

Hendrik

12-28-2010, 07:25 PM

Hendrik posted:

Late, 1700, White Crane take another evolution, Soft was introduce into White Crane and different branchs of White Crane surface in 1800.

This is consider the later day or post 1800 evolution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4NKROC5mS1c

----I don't know how anyone can watch that clip and not see some strong similarities to WCK! I think I spotted nearly all the elements of our Siu Lim Tao as well as pieces of the Biu Jee form. Coincidence? I guess it could be. All of these similar structures and techniques were derived at independently by both due to taking a similar approach to combat? I guess it could be. But it sure seems to me that the most direct and rational explanation is that the two arts shared a common ancestor. And we have a origination myth in WCK that supports that idea. Occam's razor! :)

Kieth,

There were parallel development in White Crane and White Crane derive styles around the time of SLT was created . So, we could track those and see what happen. It is like one looks at the software and know it is a Window 95, Window 2000, Window XP, or window 7 era development there are signature around it.

As for the post 1800 White Crane, If WCK is derived from that, then our hand technics will look like "brush" but we dont.

So we know it is pre 1800 White crane and so SLT must be created before 1800. and also with the evolution of post 1800 white crane we know at that time lots of expert in White Crane must have an idea to make the art better by fusing the soft way. However, how to do the soft way, that is the question. and SLT certainly took a different way compare with other White Crane branch as we could see comparing the clip above.

So, these clue is telling us, SLT is extremely likely created around the mid or end of 1700. It cant be 1680 or 1700 because that is the time where White Crane is very powerful due to its uniqueness, it is a new type of weapon. But then after 1720 or 20 years later that original weapons needs further update. and that is the start of the soft evolution of White Crane which finally settle at 1800. IMHO. So, nope according to history of the evolution there is no Shao LIn monks gathering around to create a super ultimate art but evolution and evolution and evolution to make better.

The White Crane expert of Hong Kong Uncle Kong told me, the white crane terminology within the Yik Kam SLT kuet is a pre 1800 terminology where the post 1800 doesnt use those type of old classical White Crane much today.

Again, the terminology within the Yik Kam SLT kuet is clearly a partial replical of the Emei 12 Zhuang kuen kuit.

That is how clear it is in real life what we have in our hand today.

PalmStriker

12-28-2010, 07:38 PM

Yuen Kay Shan/Sum Nung WCK possibly?

yes, KPM! You are correct. I have seen many Youtube demonstrations of the Sil Lum Tao set but thanks to you I am able to view the set as it was taught to me in 1983 by my instructor and her husband who had been living in Hong Kong. Their Sifu only instructed privately within the family at that time. I was told a story that goes along with their introduction to Wing Chun, but another time. This MA married couple (I have not been in touch with them since 1983) taught myself (crane) and my sparring partner (Kuk Sul) this set as shown in the vid I'm posting. Thank you for the information. :D:) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNEBr8XVi3Q&feature=related

PalmStriker

12-28-2010, 08:34 PM

JPinAZ

12-29-2010, 04:51 PM

For all the WCner who practice the sets " as it is."

if one take away the White Crane technology one takes away the center line.
if one take away the snake of emei technology, one's power will not get to the finger tips.

That is the reality and facts one is facing.

One can disagree with me and believe what one wants ,
but the above issues are what one needs to face and solve to get result in their sets practice.

This is a bunch of horse sh!t.

'WC Centerline' is 'WC centerline', has nothing to do with today's 'white crane' anything. If WC came from White Crane, why are they so different? Because they ARE.
And todays Emei snake has nothing to do with todays WC either, except in your head.
You're pretty much the ONLY person here saying this garbage. That is a fact.

Look, if you needed to try fix your WC by looking to other arts because you though you saw a bunch of lost stuffs, that's cool, more power to you. Probably exactly what YK did when he mixed those arts into his missing-info WC back then too! But your sadly delusional when you try to make connections between 2 or 3 totally different arts that exist today and then try guess what came from what and call it 'fact'.
My WC doesn't have any of that non-WC invisible dog petting excercize mumbo jumbo I saw your student doing in your video that you claim to be of WC. What the hell does that have to do with WC again?? Nothing. Nor does any other WC I've seen. As far as I know, you're the only one with this stuff mixed into your WC.

Maybe if you stop looking at other arts to 'reconstruct' some missing pieces, holes, distortions, what-ever-you-call-them, you might realize you should probably just go learn some more WC. Face the FACT: You need these other arts because your WCK is so lacking in so many areas, and has 'distortions' as you yourself said you see.
Maybe if you tried getting up from the dinning room table and sparred once in a while, you might figure out the only thing that needs reconstructing is your skill in your art. Then maybe you'd stop all this silly focusing on just 'sets practice', petting invisible dogs, getting together with other WCers and not training, etc ;)

On another note, all the clips showing how 'similar white crane is to WC' are BS too IMO. What I see is a totally different stance and power generation, no clear idea of WC centerline, some common-ish looking tools missing all the WC structures, no real WC gate theory, etc. But then again, these aren't videos of WC :)
So, some of the techniques look the same? BFD. All southern chinese arts are going to share some similar to one degree or another. But, what I see when I look at those videos is White Crane kung fu. Go figure. (and I might agree with Eric that it looks a little more like Weng Chun if anything)
Only reason it might look like YK WC to you is because it got mixed into his WC along the way. If all WC came from White Crane/Emei as we see them today, why are they so vastly different from WC? Exactly.

PalmStriker

12-29-2010, 07:11 PM

This is a bunch of horse sh!t.

'WC Centerline' is 'WC centerline', has nothing to do with today's 'white crane' anything. If WC came from White Crane, why are they so different? Because they ARE.
And todays Emei snake has nothing to do with todays WC either, except in your head.
You're pretty much the ONLY person here saying this garbage. That is a fact.

Look, if you needed to try fix your WC by looking to other arts because you though you saw a bunch of lost stuffs, that's cool, more power to you. Probably exactly what YK did when he mixed those arts into his missing-info WC back then too! But your sadly delusional when you try to make connections between 2 or 3 totally different arts that exist today and then try guess what came from what and call it 'fact'.
My WC doesn't have any of that non-WC invisible dog petting excercize mumbo jumbo I saw your student doing in your video that you claim to be of WC. What the hell does that have to do with WC again?? Nothing. Nor does any other WC I've seen. As far as I know, you're the only one with this stuff mixed into your WC.

Maybe if you stop looking at other arts to 'reconstruct' some missing pieces, holes, distortions, what-ever-you-call-them, you might realize you should probably just go learn some more WC. Face the FACT: You need these other arts because your WCK is so lacking in so many areas, and has 'distortions' as you yourself said you see.
Maybe if you tried getting up from the dinning room table and sparred once in a while, you might figure out the only thing that needs reconstructing is your skill in your art. Then maybe you'd stop all this silly focusing on just 'sets practice', petting invisible dogs, getting together with other WCers and not training, etc ;)

On another note, all the clips showing how 'similar white crane is to WC' are BS too IMO. What I see is a totally different stance and power generation, no clear idea of WC centerline, some common-ish looking tools missing all the WC structures, no real WC gate theory, etc. But then again, these aren't videos of WC :)
So, some of the techniques look the same? BFD. All southern chinese arts are going to share some similar to one degree or another. But, what I see when I look at those videos is White Crane kung fu. Go figure. (and I might agree with Eric that it looks a little more like Weng Chun if anything)
Only reason it might look like YK WC to you is because it got mixed into his WC along the way. If all WC came from White Crane/Emei as we see them today, why are they so vastly different from WC? Exactly.

I only see an obvious connection between the Yong Chun White Crane and TCMA Wing Chun. Also see no visible connection between Wing Chun and the three internal Taoist styles. I've practiced Cranestyle for most of my life as internal/ external but have never practiced Wing Chun as an internal style. To each his own though, not good to read into a TCMA style something based on speculation.

Hendrik

12-29-2010, 08:02 PM

If all WC came from White Crane/Emei as we see them today, why are they so vastly different from WC? Exactly.

Huh? WC vastly different to your WCK?

Dont know about yours WCK,
by evidence, all WCK as the following look very similar to me.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4eWIAYvf9Q

RB93SAAT

12-29-2010, 10:58 PM

and one cant deny Emei is in WCK be it with or without the SLT or with long form or 3 sets. It is a facts cannot be deny if one needs to activate the WCK fully.

hendrik, you can't deny yik kam got some bad connection with his slt and you are completely barmy living in your own world. wong wah bo wing chun existed long before yik kam's o-mei and crane were made. it doesnt matter you don't know the difference. you are not a spokesman of any wing chun and you are not qualified to lecture anyone about wing chun kune.

pao fa lien wing chun this style is said to have its roots in the shaolin monastery and was taught by a buddhist monk whose nickname was Big East Wind (大东风). on leaving the shaolin monastery Dai Dung Fung (大东风)travelled south to canton. the buddhist monk was a member of a secret society whose aims were to overthrow the Ching Government.

刨花蓮詠春一脈來源：

少林寺被清廷所毁，寺僧便四散逃走，有散于北方其他地方，亦有南下广东，福建等地，一名绰号“ 大东风”之少林和尚（真姓名及法号已没有提起，因避清廷耳目之故，而“大东风”的意思，在当时中国民间有俗语所谓“唔好东风搅坏天”，借用其意即要造反）逃到广东，遇到两名兄弟并被收容，兄叫谢国梁，弟叫谢国樟，袓籍西樵，单灶谢，一为文官，一为武官，两人虽为清廷效力，但皆为清官，而且身为汉人，亦对满洲人欺压汉人而心感不愤。经过一段颇长日子的相处，“大东风”见两人品德端正，为官清廉，对自己礼待有加，且心系汉族，并非为虎作伥之人，就传两兄弟武功，并且透露，懂此门武功者，皆为反清义士，但此拳本无名，乃少林一脉，但少林功夫门路繁多，于散出少林后，便各自成一派，亦具派别名称。缘于本派功夫，既以反清复明为己任，当然会联络及组织各地之反凊组织（即初期之洪门等三合会），而本派暗语是“永言矢志，毋忘汉族，还我河山，大地回春”，为便以传于后世，遂将第一句“永言”合成一“咏”字，加上第四句最尾“春”字，以命名此一拳派，是为 “咏春”。何解第一句用首两字，而第四句只用最尾一字？因为“永言”合成的“咏”字，是一动词，创拳者们既身为明朝遗臣或子民，能够驱逐鞑子，还我河山，是为毕生最重要的事，所以“咏”的意思，就是告诫所有的人，要经常在心中吟咏那四句的暗语，勉励自己，不可或忘。

Pao Fa Lien Wing Chun ( 刨花蓮詠春)Lineage

This style of Wing Chun is a shaolin system which came from the north. During the revolutions against the Manchurians, a shaolin monk (少林和尚), nicknamed Dai Dong Fung (大东风)(Great East Wind), while trying to escape arrest, came to the south. In the area of Qingyuan, Guangdong, he was made a guest by bothers named Tse Gok-Leung ( 谢国梁)& Tse Gok-Jeung(谢国樟) Of the two brothers, one was a literary mandarin while the other was a military mandarin. Even though they were working for the Manchurians, but since they were of the Han tribe, and seeing how their kinsmen were being mistreated, they had a hope that one day the Manchurians would be over thrown by the Hans. After a period of time, when the monk observed that these two brothers were decent people and not corrupted mandarins, and that they also treated him with honor and respect, he taught them Wing Chun. He also disclosed that all disciples of Wing Chun are revolutionists. Since this had been discovered by the Manchurian Court, so in order to hide identity, they broke down the two characters "Wing Chun" into a secret three lined poem. That is: "Wing Yin Chi Ji" "永言矢志" (Always speak with determination), "Mo Mong Hong Juk" "毋忘汉族"(Don't forget the Han Nation), "Dai Day Wu Chun" "大地回春"(Spring will be back again).

Yim Wing Chun:
SNT, CK, BJ

Dai Dung Fung:
SNT, CK, BJ

Pao Fa Lien Wing Chun:
SNT, CK, BJ

Wong Wah Bo
SNT, CK, BJ

Leung Yee Tai:
SNT, CK, BJ

Leung Jan:
SNT, CK, BJ (foshan version)
Ching San San Sau (guloo version)
Pin San San Sau (guloo version)

Yik Kam:
SLT (incomplete wc + o-mei + crane)

Bruce Lee:
JKD (ip man wc + mma)

LoneTiger108

12-30-2010, 09:39 AM

It's good to see you all here, still chatting through the holidays! I personally have been way too busy with family gatherings, eating and drinking :D

As for this History/Mystery thread, I can see it all coming to an end soon...

Truth and History, especially in China, are really not a good mix imho

Hendrik

12-30-2010, 10:41 AM

pao fa lien wing chun this style is said to have its roots in the shaolin monastery and was taught by a buddhist monk whose nickname was Big East Wind (大东风). on leaving the shaolin monastery Dai Dung Fung (大东风)travelled south to canton. the buddhist monk was a member of a secret society whose aims were to overthrow the Ching Government.

Sure this is great.

Notice that "SAID TO BE"

Now show us which Shao Lin monastery? Show us what type of So called Shao Lin art the monk practiced and how is it identify in the past 400 years of Chinese history and chinese TCMA history.

The White Crane and Emei connection has identify and clear description of the above expectation.

Now, you got to fill in the specific trackable data.
If you can you have a case, if you cant then you dont have a case. that simple.

Eric_H

12-30-2010, 11:57 AM

Now, you got to fill in the specific trackable data.

Actually, that burden's been on you since the start of this thread. You've yet to provide and credible evidence outside of Yik Kam's personal mixing of White Crane, o-mei and wing chun that White Crane has anything to do with WCK.

If you've got documented history show it up, otherwise it's just your own personal theory (which I still disagree with based on lack of evidence).

Honestly Hendrik, it seems like someone gave you a hammer and now you're trying to convince us all everything is a nail.

KPM

12-30-2010, 12:10 PM

This is a bunch of horse sh!t. 'WC Centerline' is 'WC centerline', has nothing to do with today's 'white crane' anything. If WC came from White Crane, why are they so different? Because they ARE.

----May I suggest that you go back and actually read this thread from the beginning? Because you certainly seem to have missed some things!!! The comparison is NOT to today's White Crane, but to a past White Crane system that may have been one of the arts WCK descended from. And WCK is different from today's White Crane because it EVOLVED along different lines. Nothing exists or is created in a vacuum. This thread has been about what root methods may have contributed to the formation and evolution of WCK in its current state. Our own creation myth speaks of WCK being a combination of Snake and Crane. Again....go back and actually read the thread, but it sure seems like you missed some important points!

You're pretty much the ONLY person here saying this garbage. That is a fact.

---Again, I guess you must have missed some posts your first time through this thread, but I have said I don't find Hendrik's theories so far fetched. THAT is a fact.

Maybe if you stop looking at other arts to 'reconstruct' some missing pieces, holes, distortions, what-ever-you-call-them, you might realize you should probably just go learn some more WC. Face the FACT: You need these other arts because your WCK is so lacking in so many areas, and has 'distortions' as you yourself said you see.

---Rather than attacking Hendrik, why don't you just stick to the historical evidence. I think the evidence supports the idea that WCK evolved from an art influenced by a snake and a crane style, more than it supports the idea that it came from the Shaolin temple. You may disagree. This is all theory anyway. But about discussing the evidence rather than attacking Hendrik?

On another note, all the clips showing how 'similar white crane is to WC' are BS too IMO. What I see is a totally different stance and power generation, no clear idea of WC centerline, some common-ish looking tools missing all the WC structures, no real WC gate theory, etc. But then again, these aren't videos of WC :)

---You choose to see the differences and I choose to see the similarities. If you have already decided what your opinion is, then you aren't going to see the things you don't want to see. THAT'S a fact!

Only reason it might look like YK WC to you is because it got mixed into his WC along the way. If all WC came from White Crane/Emei as we see them today, why are they so vastly different from WC?

---Again, you seemed to have missed a very important point. We are talking about events that happened 150 to 200 years ago. So of course, WCK didn't come from "White Crane/Emei as we see them today." WCK has evolved with time. White Crane has evolved with time. Emei has involved with time. Again....WCK didn't spring forth from a vacuum. Its originators were very likely experienced martial artists. The theory is that the base they worked from in creating WCK may have been a crane style and a snake style. Why is that so hard to grasp or accept? The similarities between WCK and other styles that exist today suggests a common origin. That's all. Things change over 150 to 200 years!

Syn7

12-30-2010, 12:14 PM

KPM

12-30-2010, 12:18 PM

Eric:

---I thought we had reached something of a "comfortable consensus." But I guess not.

You wrote:
You've yet to provide and credible evidence outside of Yik Kam's personal mixing of White Crane, o-mei and wing chun that White Crane has anything to do with WCK.

---I thought I pretty clearly outlined the evidence supporting the theory. I talked about WCK's own origination myth talking about a snake and a crane. I talked about the remarkable similarities that WCK shares with Yong Chun White Crane that supports the idea that they may have both come from a common root. I talked about the application of Occam's Razor to what little evidence we have. I think these things could certainly suggest that WCK may have something to do with White Crane! Why do you guys keep attacking Hendrik?

If you've got documented history show it up, otherwise it's just your own personal theory (which I still disagree with based on lack of evidence).

---The alternate theory is that WCK came from the Shaolin temple. Do you support that theory? If so, then how about showing the evidence that backs that up? If you don't have a personal theory, then why attack someone elses?

Eric_H

12-30-2010, 01:12 PM

---I thought we had reached something of a "comfortable consensus." But I guess not.
---I thought I pretty clearly outlined the evidence supporting the theory. I talked about WCK's own origination myth talking about a snake and a crane. I talked about the remarkable similarities that WCK shares with Yong Chun White Crane that supports the idea that they may have both come from a common root. I talked about the application of Occam's Razor to what little evidence we have. I think these things could certainly suggest that WCK may have something to do with White Crane! Why do you guys keep attacking Hendrik?

Keith,

Yes, you outlined your theory on a potential for White Crane and WCK to be related. I disagree with your theory, but FWIW you've put up some decent reasoning behind it. I'm not trying to slight you, nor am I attacking Hendrik - I've pointed out that if he wants to claim things about WCK history he should be expected to provide some evidence if possible. Otherwise it remains a personal theory based on preferences and should be designated as such.

Without debate we can't be exposed to other viewpoints and consider different angles - that's why i appreciate what you put out about your own WCK history theory.

Also in regards to what you said below:

the comparison is NOT to today's White Crane, but to a past White Crane system that may have been one of the arts WCK descended from

Then you cannot use the white crane video I posted as a valid comparison as it is not a direct comparison of WCK to todays white crane, but rather a proto-white crane art which does not exist today. In that case the development of centerline in Hendrik's claim may be a later addition to White Crane and not valid in the WCK discussion.

As for my personal theory, it is just that - my personal theory, same as yours or Hendrik's. The issue comes in when people start treating their opinion as "facts" like Hendrik is doing.

Eric_H

12-30-2010, 01:20 PM

question about the first post...

so if i learn wing chun at the age of like 5 and now im 20 years old and pretty good at it, then i decide to train my 37 year old father, he is my senior because he's my father??? or what if i get my sifu to train my father, he is my senior because father cannot be junior to son??? that seems rediculous to me... anyone feel ike clearing that up for me??? it doesnt seem right...

i can sort of understand if im a child and my father and i learn from the same sifu, he would be my senior... i get that... but what if im no child and our potential for learning is more on par with eachother than the whole adult vs child dynamic???

I'm not the OP, but I believe WWB was training significantly longer that Yik Kam and that he was a "Wing Chun Senior" or sihing to Yik Kam - not an age designation (though WWB may have been older).

anerlich

12-30-2010, 01:40 PM

question about the first post...

so if i learn wing chun at the age of like 5 and now im 20 years old and pretty good at it, then i decide to train my 37 year old father, he is my senior because he's my father??? or what if i get my sifu to train my father, he is my senior because father cannot be junior to son??? that seems rediculous to me... anyone feel ike clearing that up for me??? it doesnt seem right...

i can sort of understand if im a child and my father and i learn from the same sifu, he would be my senior... i get that... but what if im no child and our potential for learning is more on par with eachother than the whole adult vs child dynamic???

After reading this thread, you might have twigged that common sense is a rare commodity in the WC world.

There are no "WC relationship police" out there (though some might wish to assume such a role, it would appear). A sensible person would worry about the situation when it came up.

Wayfaring

12-30-2010, 01:46 PM

question about the first post...

so if i learn wing chun at the age of like 5 and now im 20 years old and pretty good at it, then i decide to train my 37 year old father, he is my senior because he's my father??? or what if i get my sifu to train my father, he is my senior because father cannot be junior to son??? that seems rediculous to me... anyone feel ike clearing that up for me??? it doesnt seem right...

i can sort of understand if im a child and my father and i learn from the same sifu, he would be my senior... i get that... but what if im no child and our potential for learning is more on par with eachother than the whole adult vs child dynamic???

Syn7,

Please review the following video - that ought to clear it up for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYlJH81dSiw

PalmStriker

12-30-2010, 01:53 PM

Syn7,

Please review the following video - that ought to clear it up for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYlJH81dSiw

Now that makes sense.:D

JPinAZ

12-30-2010, 06:12 PM

----May I suggest that you go back and actually read this thread from the beginning? Because you certainly seem to have missed some things!!! The comparison is NOT to today's White Crane, but to a past White Crane system that may have been one of the arts WCK descended from. And WCK is different from today's White Crane because it EVOLVED along different lines. Nothing exists or is created in a vacuum. This thread has been about what root methods may have contributed to the formation and evolution of WCK in its current state. Our own creation myth speaks of WCK being a combination of Snake and Crane. Again....go back and actually read the thread, but it sure seems like you missed some important points!

Thanks, but I've read this thread, and there's a reason I held of posting after my OP. And, I don't think I missed the points you think I did and my thoughts still stand. Maybe you shouldn't assume too much about my reading skills.

FWIW, we can't compare any arts 'as they were a long time ago' because really, no one really knows what they were back then (although some here think they have some magic crystal ball the allows them to do just his, Hendrik being one of them).
The only thing that can be compared are the arts as they are today.
How do you know how much White Crane has evolved? You don't. Guessing what they all might have looked like 200 years ago, or assuming that they even evolved to such sever degree that they don't look anything like they did in 1850 is a waste of time. Why? no proof - It's all guessing. But that is exactly what Hendrik does time and again. He even goes as far to say that WCK today has lost a whole bunch of 'stuffs' and that he is able to reconstruct it from old text. Don't you see how silly this is?

Here's another angle: If we look at only WCK and what we can see today (same lineage or across all lineages), there are a lot of differences in theory, shapes, application and training methods. Some have back weighted stance, some 50/50, some side body, etc. And the bickering on forums like this are a good example. It is safe to say that all these differences even in our own art are a result of evolution. And yeah, at one point, there weren't all these differences. But who can guess what the 'real WCK' looked like 200 years ago? No one. The only thing we can look at and compare is what's behind what we see (the meat of the arts - concpets, principles, training methods, etc).

Take it a step further and look at White Crane - big differences across that art to if we look at what we have today. But guessing what it 'may have looked like' way-back-when, and then comparing it to what we guess WCK looked like back then and then concluding "WCK came from White Crane" is futile IMO.

Hey, I've got an idea - White Crane originally came from WCK and that's why they look the same! Can you prove me wrong? ;)

You're pretty much the ONLY person here saying this garbage. That is a fact.

---Again, I guess you must have missed some posts your first time through this thread, but I have said I don't find Hendrik's theories so far fetched. THAT is a fact.

Because he has some theories doesn't make them 'fact', regardless who might agree with him.

---Rather than attacking Hendrik, why don't you just stick to the historical evidence. I think the evidence supports the idea that WCK evolved from an art influenced by a snake and a crane style, more than it supports the idea that it came from the Shaolin temple. You may disagree. This is all theory anyway. But about discussing the evidence rather than attacking Hendrik?

What 'evidence' are you talking about? Be specific. Because if you're saying that what we can see in white crane and snake of today is evidence that WCK came from a merging of those two, then you're going to need to do better than that. 'specially if you also say above that white crane probably doesn't lok the same today as it did back then.

Also, was I really attacking Hendrik? He's said himself that he sees distortions, missing informations and 'stuffs' in his WCK (and further, in all WCK), and that he can somehow reconstruct all the missing info by looking at old texts and by somehow looking into the past. I'm just commenting that I think that's a pretty rediculous thing to say, and that the holes and distortions just might be in his inability to apply his WCK. Again, how the hell does anyone know what is missing or what info has evolved since the 1850's?

And yes, I'll agree: WCK does share some elements/signatures from snake and crane if you compare the systems as we see them today. bfd. All southern TCMA will have that. That still doesn't prove one bit Hendriks (and yours?) theory that WCk was birthed from mixing for White Crane and Emei and was originally one long version of SLT that then later got chopped up into SLT/CK/BJ.

---You choose to see the differences and I choose to see the similarities. If you have already decided what your opinion is, then you aren't going to see the things you don't want to see. THAT'S a fact!

I didn't 'chose to see' anything. I simply compared what I saw to what I know. While yes, some of the stuff does resemble what hendrik's WCK might look like, and there are clearly some similar looking techniques to all WCK (and all southern chinese kung fu for that matter). But that's all surface level stuff.

My thoughts regarding stance, power generation, gate theory, structure and a bunch of other stuff was derived from looking at more than just the surface technique level stuff you are. Maybe you're the one that can't 'see'?

Again, stop assuming what I have decided or am able to see in those clips, what points I missed or anything else. You're starting to make an a$$ of yourself.

---Again, you seemed to have missed a very important point. We are talking about events that happened 150 to 200 years ago. So of course, WCK didn't come from "White Crane/Emei as we see them today." WCK has evolved with time. White Crane has evolved with time. Emei has involved with time. Again....WCK didn't spring forth from a vacuum. Its originators were very likely experienced martial artists. The theory is that the base they worked from in creating WCK may have been a crane style and a snake style. Why is that so hard to grasp or accept? The similarities between WCK and other styles that exist today suggests a common origin. That's all. Things change over 150 to 200 years!

There you go 'ass'uming to know what I missed again...

No sh!t things change.
Of course there are common origins! Who the hell said otherwise? I don't deny that WCk's creation came from a merging of collective arts. But really, WCK is a lot more than that (at least to me anyway). WCK is about removing all the different styles of the past and focusing on what works most effective and efficient in combat. It's about removing previous personal style or preference and getting to reality of combat.

Since you like to talk of 'facts' and 'evidence', please look into your little crystal ball and tell us all what exactly did White Crane, Emei and WCK look like 150 to 200 years ago? (if, as you say, they've evloved so much) Because if you can't do that, you really have no point or proof regarding what came from what except what I am looking at - what we have today.

But really, who cares what anything looked like back then anyway? What does that have to do with WCK today? The only issue I have is when some people come here and pretend they have some inside knowledge that something is vastly missing in all of today's wing chun, and that only they have the answers or keys for unlocking those missing secrets. :rolleyes:
Unless you also believe this to be true?

Hendrik

12-30-2010, 07:57 PM

Since you like to talk of 'facts' and 'evidence', please look into your little crystal ball and tell us all what exactly did White Crane, Emei and WCK look like 150 to 200 years ago? (if, as you say, they've evloved so much) Because if you can't do that, you really have no point or proof regarding what came from what except what I am looking at - what we have today.

No need crystall ball, just go do some research in TCMA,

White Crane looks closer to Karate or Okinamate 200 years ago prior to the soft components fuse into White Crane which evolve into different branches today.

Emei 12 Zhuang was kept very similar for 200 years, since it is a one generation per single person high quality control coaching and following Kuen Kuit teaching.

WCK's Biu Jee 1850 looks like the 3.34 -- 3.6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4eWIAYvf9Q

with more detials in the body motion/movement handling interm of Qi medirian flow compare with today.

GlennR

12-30-2010, 08:15 PM

No need crystall ball, just go do some research in TCMA,

White Crane looks closer to Karate or Okinamate 200 years ago prior to the soft components fuse into White Crane which evolve into different branches today.

Emei 12 Zhuang was kept very similar for 200 years, since it is a one generation per single person high quality control coaching and following Kuen Kuit teaching.

WCK's Biu Jee 1850 looks like the 3.34 -- 3.6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4eWIAYvf9Q

with more detials in the body motion/movement handling interm of Qi medirian flow compare with today.

Hendrick
How do you know?
GlennR

Hendrik

12-30-2010, 09:29 PM

Hendrick
How do you know?
GlennR

I have done some research on it.

GlennR

12-30-2010, 10:38 PM

I have done some research on it.

So your research is completely faultless and the absolute truth?

Hendrik

12-30-2010, 10:52 PM

So your research is completely faultless and the absolute truth?

Do your own and find out for yourself.

GlennR

12-30-2010, 10:54 PM

Do your own and find out for yourself.

Im doing it now....... and its surprising how quickly i found the BS

JPinAZ

12-30-2010, 11:28 PM

I have done some research on it.

You've done 'some' research? And now your present your findings as 'fact'. Very interesting..

White Crane looks closer to Karate or Okinamate 200 years ago prior to the soft components fuse into White Crane which evolve into different branches today.

Again, all BS. You have no idea what any of those arts looked like 200 years ago. This is why you come off as such a fraud here. Where is your evidence?

Emei 12 Zhuang was kept very similar for 200 years, since it is a one generation per single person high quality control coaching and following Kuen Kuit teaching.

Not saying it isn't so, but can you verify this?
BTW, what the hell does this have to do with WCK, or my original post? If you can't keep to the topic, take a hike.

WCK's Biu Jee 1850 looks like the 3.34 -- 3.6

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4eWIAYvf9Q

with more detials in the body motion/movement handling interm of Qi medirian flow compare with today.

Again, total nonsense BS. What proof do you have of what anything looked like 160 years ago? that's right, none.

If you care to discuss the topic, and since you claim to have done all this investigating into the past, what proof do you have that YK WC was more original with it's one long hodg-podge SLT+Crane+Emie? (even when his much senior WWB taught 3 forms, and none of the mixed in crane/emei)
Do you have even one bit of verifiable evidence other than speculation?
And don't give us the usual avoiding BS about doing the research ourselves. You're the one making the silly claims, it's on you to prove you're not just flatulating our your rear end.

Hendrick
How do you know?
GlennR

Simple, he doesn't know. He's grasping at straws.

t_niehoff

12-31-2010, 06:56 AM

Again, total nonsense BS. What proof do you have of what anything looked like 160 years ago? that's right, none.

If you care to discuss the topic, and since you claim to have done all this investigating into the past, what proof do you have that YK WC was more original with it's one long hodg-podge SLT+Crane+Emie? (even when his much senior WWB taught 3 forms, and none of the mixed in crane/emei)
Do you have even one bit of verifiable evidence other than speculation?
And don't give us the usual avoiding BS about doing the research ourselves. You're the one making the silly claims, it's on you to prove you're not just flatulating our your rear end.

We can tell what WCK looked like by looking at the older branches of WCK and seeing the commonalities. For example, if you want to know what WCK looked like in turn of the century Foshan (1900), you can see early Yip, YKS, etc. and see how very similar it is. Hendrik/Sergio is actually correct about the movement in the biu jee. That action is retained by the older branches.

Again, I think you are misstating Hendrik's view -- he is not saying that Yik Kam is "more original" just that it retains those older aspects. To think in terms of "original" is a mistake IMO. Nor is Yik Kam WCK a hodge-podge of SLT, white crane and Emei 12 jong -- this misstates, probably intentionally, his view. I think Hendrik is suggesting that WCK was derived from a fusion of white crane and Emei 12 Jong, and that his lineage clearly maintains evidence of that in their SLT and KK -- though you can see it in all the older, legit lineages.

I do, however, commend you for asking for evidence, and for your skeptical attitude toward historical claims (I wonder if you apply the same standards to your own lineage).

Hendrik

12-31-2010, 07:46 AM

Im doing it now....... and its surprising how quickly i found the BS

Share your evidence and data of what it is instead of your empty claim which is meaning less.

Hendrik

12-31-2010, 07:58 AM

Since you are such and expert with high standard,

Tell us where YOUR Hung Gan Biu WCK instead of the Shao Lin WCK ( as VTM have publicly making the correction ) comes from?

Who is Hung Gan Biu? What is his real name?

How come there is not mention of Hung Gan Biu in the Red Boat list of "REAL " people such as WWB, LYT, YK, CS....etc.

How come Hung Gan Biu WCK is adapting to three sets methodology which Leung Jan and WWB created or modified?

Seems like Hung Gan Biu was either a student or grand student of Leung Jan using Leong's creation of 3 sets methodology, what is the facts?

Where and When Hung Gan Biu existed and can it be track as WWB, LJ, YK,....etc? can he be tracked in the history of China or village of China?

Also , is it your team's strategy for past decade is to Keep attacking other Red Boat WCK with nonsense to keep other busy to cover up for the Modern 1980 creation Hung Gan Biu WCK ?

These are straight questions lots of WCners are asking, please answer it with evidence.
So, answer the above and not defocus on other legitimate track able WCK lineage.
You need to show your Id and trackable record to join the WCK lineage club.

Thanks in advance for your expertise and proffesionalism.

You've done 'some' research? And now your present your findings as 'fact'. Very interesting..

Again, all BS. You have no idea what any of those arts looked like 200 years ago. This is why you come off as such a fraud here. Where is your evidence?

Not saying it isn't so, but can you verify this?
BTW, what the hell does this have to do with WCK, or my original post? If you can't keep to the topic, take a hike.

Again, total nonsense BS. What proof do you have of what anything looked like 160 years ago? that's right, none.

If you care to discuss the topic, and since you claim to have done all this investigating into the past, what proof do you have that YK WC was more original with it's one long hodg-podge SLT+Crane+Emie? (even when his much senior WWB taught 3 forms, and none of the mixed in crane/emei)
Do you have even one bit of verifiable evidence other than speculation?
And don't give us the usual avoiding BS about doing the research ourselves. You're the one making the silly claims, it's on you to prove you're not just flatulating our your rear end.

Simple, he doesn't know. He's grasping at straws.

JPinAZ

12-31-2010, 08:46 AM

We can tell what WCK looked like by looking at the older branches of WCK and seeing the commonalities. For example, if you want to know what WCK looked like in turn of the century Foshan (1900), you can see early Yip, YKS, etc. and see how very similar it is. Hendrik/Sergio is actually correct about the movement in the biu jee. That action is retained by the older branches.

Yeah, but that means you can verify what are the actual 'older branches of WCK'. First, define 'older branches' and then list them.
Of course there are commonalities - they are all WC!!! Wow, what a smart guy :rolleyes:
But, if you're going to look at commonalities, you have to take into account the differences as well - and you are ignoring that some of those 'older branches' you speak of have very big differences as well. just in the Yip lines, you can see a whole lot of differences in the forms, applications, curriculum, etc. And unless you're 110 years old, you can only guess what existed in 1900 Foshan. You can really only lok at what existed within the last 20-30 years.
As far as the BJ movements being retained by the older branches - prove it. List all the 'older branches' that retain this movement you are talking about. If you can't list them, you're just talking BS out your rear end like Hendrik

Again, I think you are misstating Hendrik's view -- he is not saying that Yik Kam is "more original" just that it retains those older aspects. To think in terms of "original" is a mistake IMO. Nor is Yik Kam WCK a hodge-podge of SLT, white crane and Emei 12 jong -- this misstates, probably intentionally, his view. I think Hendrik is suggesting that WCK was derived from a fusion of white crane and Emei 12 Jong, and that his lineage clearly maintains evidence of that in their SLT and KK -- though you can see it in all the older, legit lineages.

I'm not misstating anything, no matter how much you or Robert or hendrik try to change Hendrik's tune. And yes, Hendrik has said here over and over that originally WCK was a direct fusion of white crane and Emei as one long SLT from before it was broken up into SLT/CK/BJ, and that that split didn't happen all too long ago.
So, are you going to tell me that since his YK single SLT still exists, he isn't saying it is more original? (which yes, he has!) If not, then that means someone very recently made it up and he's full of BS. And, if it is so, simply prove it. Just like I've asked him to do (which I'm still waiting for)

As far as your older, legit lineages, that's BS too. You can only look at what exists today. You have no idea what is older or 'legit' unless you were there - even in 1900. If we look at anything you list as older or more-legit as it sits today (which is all we can do), you will see all kinds of differences as well as the commonalities. This is just smoke screen to cover hendrik's butt.[/QUOTE]

I do, however, commend you for asking for evidence, and for your skeptical attitude toward historical claims (I wonder if you apply the same standards to your own lineage).

I could give 2 sh!ts about you commending me on anything.

JPinAZ

12-31-2010, 09:27 AM

Since you are such and expert with high standard,

Tell us where YOUR Hung Gan Biu WCK instead of the Shao Lin WCK ( as VTM have publicly making the correction ) comes from?

Quit trying to change the subject with your BS. Either stick to the topic of the thread or maybe trying answering my questions my or leave. If you genuinely want to know about HFY or it's ancestors, start your own thread.

Here they are again:

What proof do you have of what anything looked like 160 years ago besides guessing?
What proof do you have that YK WC was more original with it's one long mix-bag SLT+Crane+Emie? (even when his much senior WWB taught 3 forms, and none of the mixed in crane/emei)
Or that it even existed as one long form at all before YK WC? As far as I can tell, it's the only one.
Do you have even one bit of verifiable evidence other than speculation?
And again, don't give us the usual avoiding BS about doing the research ourselves, my lineage or anything else. You're the one making the silly claims, it's on you to prove you're not just flatulating our your rear end.

t_niehoff

12-31-2010, 09:36 AM

Yeah, but that means you can verify what are the actual 'older branches of WCK'. First, define 'older branches' and then list them.
Of course there are commonalities - they are all WC!!! Wow, what a smart guy :rolleyes:

Yeah, I am a smart guy.

The older branches are those that can be traced via independent, verifiable lineage (of genuine, living people that wecan show practiced WCK) back to mid-1800s, and those people descending from them. For example, we know Leung Jan existed, knew WCK, taught certain people, etc.

But, if you're going to look at commonalities, you have to take into account the differences as well - and you are ignoring that some of those 'older branches' you speak of have very big differences as well.

The commonalities are often disguised as differences. For example, two branches may use different terms or different points for the same thing. WCK is WCK. And different people may teach "it" slightly differently. Remember, the curriculum is not the subject matter.

But, yes, some differences do exist. And those creep in for various reasons. But they will not help you find what is WCK.

just in the Yip lines, you can see a whole lot of differences in the forms, applications, curriculum, etc.

The differences in forms don't matter. That's like saying the textbook is slightly different. What matters is the subject matter.

What you call "applications" are not application -- at best those are "examples" people use to demo certain points. For example, Alan's video of the pak sao to break structure. That isn't "application. At worst (and most often) they are fantasy sequences that people who have no clue as to application and can't fight use to tell others how to do it. For example, Victor's WCK vs. hook farce.

And unless you're 110 years old, you can only guess what existed in 1900 Foshan. You can really only lok at what existed within the last 20-30 years.
As far as the BJ movements being retained by the older branches - prove it. List all the 'older branches' that retain this movement you are talking about. If you can't list them, you're just talking BS out your rear end like Hendrik

No. You can look at early Yip people, for example, and early YKS people, and compare to see how WCK "looked" on Foshan circa 1900. Then if you compare that to let's say how the various branches of Gu Lao looks, you see many things in common. Then look at Pan Nam WCK which descends from Yip's sihing. There are also descendants of Leung Jan in Foshan (horserider is on this forum). And look for similarities.

I'm not misstating anything, no matter how much you or Robert or hendrik try to change Hendrik's tune. And yes, Hendrik has said here over and over that originally WCK was a direct fusion of white crane and Emei as one long SLT from before it was broken up into SLT/CK/BJ, and that that split didn't happen all too long ago.

Close. Hendrik's view -- not my view, mind you -- is that WCK is a fusion of white crane and emei 12 jong. And that, at least in the Yik Kam and other lineages, there was one long form, SLT.

Clearly the three forms also originated on the Red Boats (likely with Wong Wah Bo).

My own view is that WCK originated on the Red Boats since we can't find any proven lineage (or practitioners) of WCK before that time period and that the dispersal of WCK follows the movement of the Red Boats. But I don't think that it's development was formal, along the lines of "let's put A and B together", but more organic and grew out of their (certain people on the Red Boats) fighting. And probably lots of things influenced their fighting.

So, are you going to tell me that since his YK single SLT still exists, he isn't saying it is more original? (which yes, he has!) If not, then that means someone very recently made it up and he's full of BS. And, if it is so, simply prove it. Just like I've asked him to do (which I'm still waiting for)

Is "tan sao" original? What does "original" mean in this context? I think Hendrik's view is that his lineage retains a SLT, a form, that descends from the Red Boats. So what? I retain three forms that descend from the Red Boats. I also retain san sik that descend from the Red Boats. As I see it, WCK existed on the Red Boats and different people used different curriculum, some one form, some three forms, some san sik, some a combo perhaps, to teach the SAME THING. Whose tan sao is original? The guy with one form, the guy with three forms, the guy with san sik?

As far as your older, legit lineages, that's BS too. You can only look at what exists today.

No. We can trace things back in many/most cases.

You have no idea what is older or 'legit' unless you were there - even in 1900. If we look at anything you list as older or more-legit as it sits today (which is all we can do), you will see all kinds of differences as well as the commonalities. This is just smoke screen to cover hendrik's butt.

I really don't care to cover Hendrik's butt -- just take a look at the "breaking structure" thread where I call him out. Stop making it all personal.

To say that we can't know what is "older" or "legit" is simply untrue.

Hendrik

12-31-2010, 12:01 PM

Too bad the title of this thread is

Another look at Wing Chun History/Mystery

hahaha,

I have been openly disclose my view for past one decades here with data and more and more people sees and agree with WCK is from White Crane.. including your ally VTM.

Your reaction is expectable.
Attack others with nonsense so that you dont have to deal with you problem, that is the tactic isnt it? Is that the Shao Lin Buddhist Zen way?

You cant even answer a single legitimate question. at least VTM is honest enough to address the public, It is Hung Gan Biu WCK and Hung Gan Biu create it and not Shao Lin WCK.

And Who is Hung Gan Biu? No one knows, isnt this the group ten years ago call all the Old legitimate WCK " watery down version"? in that famous article?

Now, you could not even prove Hung Gan Biu is a student or grandstudent of Leung Jan since you are using Leong/WWB three sets methodology?

Your reaction has indeed tell us here what is the truth behind you.

BTW, we dont need to genuinely know, but we need you to show your ID if you have one.

You are also asking stupid question which indicate your dont have clue.

Here, figure out for yourself.

Fung Chun is in his 90's.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cm7vjAqAvjg

who is him?
how many generation between him and Leong Jan?

How close or far is the technics Fung Chun has different then Leong Jan?
When Leong Jan live? What is the relationship between Leong and WWB?

One get a clear preservation time capsule track to 1850 easily.

You cant see it because you are not belongs to the old legitimate WCK lineage, you dont have the blood line to easily see it.

---------------------------------------
Pin Sun Wing Chun, also known as "Koo Lo Wing Chun", originates from the final teachings of the one of Wing Chun’s legends, the late Dr. Leung Jan (1826 - 1901). Dr. Leung Jan received instruction from Hung Suen (Red Boat) Opera members Wong Wah Bo and Leung Yee Tai. For many years he resided and taught in Futshan.

Much later in his life he retired back to his native village of Koo Lo in the Hok San county. ....

Over the next three years Dr. Leung Jan taught his students all his skills but unfortunately, do to old age, passed away at the age of 76. His most senior student, Wong Wah Sam, went on to teach Fung Chun.

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

After saying the above, the real question is when can the WCNER be nice and focus on the technical; instead of getting personal to prove or dis prove something; but to really work as a team to discuss and help each other to get constructive out come?

Quit trying to change the subject with your BS.

Either stick to the topic of the thread or maybe trying answering my questions my or leave.

If you genuinely want to know about HFY or it's ancestors, start your own thread.

Here they are again:

What proof do you have of what anything looked like 160 years ago besides guessing?
What proof do you have that YK WC was more original with it's one long mix-bag SLT+Crane+Emie? (even when his much senior WWB taught 3 forms, and none of the mixed in crane/emei)
Or that it even existed as one long form at all before YK WC? As far as I can tell, it's the only one.
Do you have even one bit of verifiable evidence other than speculation?
And again, don't give us the usual avoiding BS about doing the research ourselves, my lineage or anything else. You're the one making the silly claims, it's on you to prove you're not just flatulating our your rear end.

LoneTiger108

12-31-2010, 01:35 PM

And Who is Hung Gan Biu? No one knows, isnt this the group ten years ago call all the Old legitimate WCK " watery down version"? in that famous article?

Now, you could not even prove Hung Gan Biu is a student or grandstudent of Leung Jan since you are using Leong/WWB three sets methodology?

I thought I might just add my ten pence worth here because I have heard something worth mentioning. Albeit just rumours or folklore, but it does make some kind of sense to me.

Hung Gun Biu 'may have been' the family name of Hung Hei Goon, who is credited with formalizing and spreading the art of Hung Gar. Therefore, he was a direct student of Jee Shim and it is also believed that these two Martial Artists sought refuge on the Red Boats.

http://www.hungkuen.net/masters-hungheigoon.htm

From my own research I can also say that the pole form I practise originated with one of Hung Hei Goons martial brothers who shared his knowledge of pole plays with people on the Red Boats, filtering down to Leung Yee Tai who Ip Family claim as the source of Wing Chun 6 point and half pole. He is also known to have lived in the same street as Wong Wah Bo and they both taught Leung Jan together in a 'new' martial art when they retired from the Red Boats.

The 'idea' of this union was made famous by the movie Prodigal Son.

All of this also points this specific lineage to Shaolin (if only briefly!) since Jee Shim is said to have taught Hung Hei Goon while he was staying at the Southern temple, perhaps again just a 'pit stop' to seek refuge. And on all counts I am really only talking of my connection regarding pole plays. It is common knowledge that the 6 1/2 pole was 'inherited' from another style, and it is Hung Gar that was more prominent with the pole in those days as far as I'm aware. It simply makes sense, no?

I also find it very interesting that from people in Hung Kuen I have talked to there seemed to be a big divide in people practising the short and long bridge systems, even going as far to suggest that the short bridge system was lost, especailly after Wong Fei Hung become very very famous throughout China. Due to his tall, slim build he perpetuated the long bridge system.

Now I'm not saying that this is fact, but again it makes sense that Wing Chun must have existed prior to the Red Boats and may have been very heavily influenced by Hung Gar practitioners whilst on the Red Boats. This too adds to the mystery as Hung Gar is also known for its many forms and sets and especially it's way of transmitting knowledge through kuit, or martial poems. All of which seems very intriguing since I have yet to see evidence of the kuit existing before the Red Boats, and during this time maybe the 'Original' Wing Chun received an overhaul and one form became three and other two man sets and loose hand techniques were also introduced.

Just something to reflect on and needs some more serious research too imho, especially because I really know very little about anything before the Red Boat as this too is very strongly represented in my own learning due to my Sifu and his family being one of the last troupes of Canton Opera performers and musicians to 'see' some of the older generations practising in the fields on the New Territories in HK! I also found some great information on Hung Kuen in their own family museum which is based in the same ancestral park as Ip Mans Tong in Foshan/Fatsan. The Ip Family were granted the space because of the close relationship between the two styles.

Well, that's my New Year gift to you all! ;):rolleyes::D

Hendrik

12-31-2010, 01:50 PM

So how easy or difficult to prove Emei 12 zhuang is infact a component which was used in WCK and not limited to Yik Kam's teaching?

It is very simple and clear.

The answer is open in front of everyone's eyes,

we know Koo Lo village is a time capsule which preserve lots of 1850's practice with low distortion ---Between Leong Jan and Fung Chun is only one generation a part.

Look at what Fung Chun the living grand student of DR. Leong Jan did in 0.37-0.38

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5cqRp-YtuM&feature=related

that is the Emei 12 Zhuang's signature "the five fingers trace the taiji". this five fingers trace the taiji move is a training in additional to the Biu jee to open up energy channel to the tip of the fingers.

Why is this emei 12 zhuang 's specific signature practice by Fung Chun in the middle of homeland of Leong Jan Koo Lo in version of WCK which Leong Jan himself created?

Why is this signature also practice in other old WCK lineage?

See, I didnt even mention Yik Kam WCK or Cho family, which is a totaly different lineage.

So, the emei signature is there. even Leong Jan has that Emei 12 Zhuang Component on finger technics training.

so, we know in 1850 era Leong Jan has been exposed to the Emei 12 Zhuang elements, and it is also important otherwise he will not include it in his latest version of WCK.
and it is not exclusive to Yik Kam's but pre -Leong Jan WCK has those stuffs and still preversed today in older lineage such as Koo Lo.

Jim who is a legitimate Koo Lo WCner wrote this, he has met Fung Chun and the gate Keeper of Emei 12 zhuang. so he has first hand experience on the issue.

--------------------------------------------
Tracing the Taiji Circle

In the lineages of Fung, Cho, Yuen and others there is a common Sao Kuen/Sik (Fist or Section Closing Sequence) often referred to as Lop Sao, which is also popular in most south fist traditions. The Taiji Circle is “O”-shape and an older, symbolic term for the line the fingers follow when performing the action. Fung Chun, head of the Fung family of Wing Chun, can be seen performing this on his son’s web site when demonstrating some basics of his art.

During lunch with Grandmaster Fu Wei Zong, I pulled out some Kuen Kuit notes which originated with Wing Chun ancestor Yik Kam (of the Red Junk opera) and passed down through the Cho family. Grandmaster Fu asked me to read them to him. At first I don’t think he realized what they were but when I told him they were notes from Miao Shun he stopped me. “This is your poetry?” he asked. “Yes”, I answered and continued to read on. Grandmaster Fu stopped me again a number of times with questions about this or that note, but the one time that really stood out was when I read the term Taiji Circle. Grandmaster Fu asked me to show him what this was and after I showed him he said: “Yes! That is our Tracing the Taiji Circle!”

Since the Wing Chun movement was so similar to the more general version of this training, the differences or “Little Details” became important: the individual knuckle to knuckle (joint by joint) and opening/closing of the six bones of the hand that makes Wing Chun’s unique from the others.
-------------------------

http://www.w1ng.com/mystery-of-the-snake-and-crane-emei-connection/

Vajramusti

12-31-2010, 02:37 PM

Hendrik-The link to koo lo is damaged and doesn't work.

Many wing chun lineages including Ip Man's recognizes the snake and crane as ancestor arts.
Details of their meaning can vary. I don't depend on Hendrik to see the frequent appearance of the snake and crane in well known and old wing chun lineages.

Of course "acceptance" is a personal thing and opinions can vary. Hendrik has not claimed that Yik Kam is the ancestor of other wing chun.

But interestingly in Hendrik's possession are copies of twp person martial touch positions in the form of drawings from the Emei monastery/temple treasures. The angles of the hand and the position of the feet looks like wing chun.

I don't do Yik Kam's art. What I do in the Ip Man tradition is pretty complete- to me.
Many Yik Kam folks keep their wing chun separate from some of the other things that they do.Others may mix them.

Ip man seems to have synthesized quite well- two different strands of wing chun-from Chan Wah Sun and ahem- from Leung Jan via Leung Bik.Whatever one may think of Ip Chun and Ip Ching's wing chun as sons they knew what their father told them about his own life till he left for Macao.

Best wishes for a New Year to all wing chun folks.Hope that the new year brings less noise
and more info on the art.

History is not a natural science. Good history involves some proofs but lots of interpretations and revisions. But certainly the tracing of lineages from Yip Man via Leung Jan to the red boat is a fairly reliable story-real people with fairly clear life stories... and few things are ex nihilo- so the red boats folks are bound to have had borrowed ideas from other ancestors.

There really isn't a scholarly history of wing chun to date.Experience is a big part of doing wing chun well. But empiricism is necessary but can be blind. Those who can apply a standard or measure for judging experience can IMO have a leg up in undertstanding the art.

Joy Chaudhuri

Hendrik

12-31-2010, 02:59 PM

Joy,

Try this and see if it works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5cqRp-YtuM&feature=related

Vajramusti

12-31-2010, 07:11 PM

Joy,

Try this and see if it works.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5cqRp-YtuM&feature=related
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thx Hendrk- it did. Gu Lo is not my cup of tea. But I understand your comment.

joy chaudhuri

Hendrik

12-31-2010, 07:15 PM

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thx Hendrk- it did. Gu Lo is not my cup of tea. But I understand your comment.

joy chaudhuri

Glad you see it.

evidentally the Emei signature is there in the home town of Leong Jan..

both one single long form and emei signature has been found and confirm in Leong Jan's lineage. Again, Yik Kam is not the only one has these.

WCK is Crane + Snake and one doesnt have to look far if one knows how to look in one's own backward for those treasure.

So, for those who keep postulate wanting to seperate Yik Kam lineage from other WCK lineages for their own agenda to change history, by evident, they have no chance. and it is time to question the motivation behind them.

Today is 1-1-11, similar to decade ago when white crane was brought up by evidents, Emei snake is brought up now and no longer can be denied. IMHO.

RB93SAAT

12-31-2010, 07:44 PM

pao fa lien wing chun this lineage is said to have its roots in the shaolin monastery and was taught by a buddhist monk whose nickname was Big East Wind (大东风). on leaving the shaolin monastery Dai Dung Fung (大东风)travelled south to canton. the buddhist monk was a member of a secret society whose aims were to overthrow the Ching Government.

Yim Wing Chun:
SNT, CK, BJ

Dai Dung Fung:
SNT, CK, BJ

Pao Fa Lien Wing Chun:
SNT, CK, BJ

Wong Wah Bo
SNT, CK, BJ

Leung Yee Tai:
SNT, CK, BJ

Leung Jan:
SNT, CK, BJ (foshan version)
Ching San San Sau (guloo version)
Pin San San Sau (guloo version)

Yik Kam:
SLT (incomplete wc + o-mei + crane)

Bruce Lee:
JKD (ip man wc + mma)

hendrik, you can't back up your rediculous claim such as 'wing chun came from o-mei and crane.' you preach yik kam slt as original wing chun and attacking others to cover up your hypocritical behavior. you totally ignore peoples' questions and are only capable of a one sided speech. most people know where did bruce lee learn his wing chun from, but nobody really know where did yik kam learn his incomplete wing chun? where did yik kam learn his o-mei? who was yik kam's o-mei teacher? where did yik kam learn his crane? which crane school and who was his teacher? once again, you can't give us any details to back up your claims.

poa fa lien wing chun came from shaolin monastery, wong wak bo-leung jan-ip man-william cheung, in cheung's books he mentioned his wing chun also came from shaolin monastery. in ching wu school where i came from, many of my teachers also said the same thing. all these facts are telling you one thing, yik kam slt was his own creation which got nothing to do with the real wing chun. poa fa lien wing chun, yim wing chun, wong wah bo wing chun long existed before yik kam slt. you go figure where did yik kam slt from?

unlike yik kam slt, came from three different places, o-mei mountain? which area of o-mei mountain did yik kam pick up his o-mei 12 zheung? fukien? which crane school did yik kam learn his crane boxing in fukien? snake? which snake school did yik kam learn his snake boxing? most snake boxing were from north in 200 years ago, they were not in fukien area.

o-mei 12 zheung is a set of very simple heahth execise, i saw you blowing hot air but doing nothing, and let your student showing some simple o-mei excecise, and the problem his skill level was very low and i couldn't see or find any good o-mei kung fu there. are you really sure your are qualified to speak for o-mei kung fu system?

Hendrik

12-31-2010, 07:54 PM

As a summary from my previous posts:

With the following two video clips;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V5cqRp-YtuM&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I4eWIAYvf9Q

and horserider's reveal one long form is practiced in the Leong Jan related lineage ;
and the three sets are the creation of LJ /WWB.

With the "time capsule" in different lineages such as senior Fung Chun in Koo Lo and other village in China, we all could have a glimpse of how WCK looks in 1850.

We know WCK is indeed White Crane + Emei Snake by evidence via lineage without even include Yik Kam lineage. The first order verification has been done here.

Those who postulate WCK is from Shao Lin are expected to give as details as above or even more to proof their claiming, until then, there is no facture evidence, at least up to this second. and even if there is evident from Shao Lin, the White Crane + Emei Snake in WCK is a reality disregard of Shao Lin involve or not.

Thus, the case of White Crane + Emei snake is closed.

Just wanted to take another look at some of WC's history (and mystery) sparked from another thread.

Originally posted on recent thread:

Thank you for sharing this information. While not everyone believes the Yim Wing Chun legend, it is clear that WC has been around before the time of Wong Wah Bo and then clearly before Yik Kam as listed in the tree above (even if WWB isn't listed in this tree). Curious if you've heard of Leung Lan Kwai learning from Leung Bak So who in turn taught Wong Wah Bo?
Anyway, the reason I bring up WWB is because of the big differences I see between just about everyone that comes down from his teachings and those few lines that come from from Yik Kam.

Why is it all the lines that come down from Wong Wah Bo's teachings have 3 hand forms while his juniors wing chun (Yik Kam) only has one long SLT?

It has been said on this forum that Yik Kam (or his teacher) is the creator of Wing Chun with it's single SLT form and mixture of Omei and White Crane, and that it is the 'original' WCK coming from Omei-Crane. It would also be believed that this one SLT was then later split into SNT/CK/BJ as we have today (in both WWB descendants and several non-WWB lineages).
Also, how can most all other lines that draw down from Yim Wing Chun, or even Wong Wah Bo (Yik Kam's senior) already have 3 hand forms and none (or very little) of the strong Omei and White Crane signatures seen only in YK's 1 SLT today if it is the original?? Also, if it is true that YK's 'original' 1 slt was split into 3 forms, why is it still 1 from in YK WCK today?

This tells me that the 1 long SLT was YK's invention after training some WC, along with the mixing in of the omei/crane information. and that is why it is still 1 long form today as opposed to the traditional 3 the rest of the WC community has that traces their lineage past YK. (except for Gulo's point system)

Hendrik

12-31-2010, 08:01 PM

"Is said" doesnt mean anything. Show us solid evidents as we present here.

pao fa lien wing chun this lineage is said to have its roots in the shaolin monastery ........

RB93SAAT

12-31-2010, 08:26 PM

Those who postulate WCK is from Shao Lin are expected to give as details as above or even more to proof their claiming, until then, there is no facture evidence, at least up to this second. and even if there is evident from Shao Lin, the White Crane + Emei Snake in WCK is a reality disregard of Shao Lin involve or not.

刨花蓮詠春一脈來源：

少林寺被清廷所毁，寺僧便四散逃走，有散于北方其他地方，亦有南下广东，福建等地，一名绰号“ 大东风”之少林和尚（真姓名及法号已没有提起，因避清廷耳目之故，而“大东风”的意思，在当时中国民间有俗语所谓“唔好东风搅坏天”，借用其意即要造反）逃到广东，遇到两名兄弟并被收容，兄叫谢国梁，弟叫谢国樟，袓籍西樵，单灶谢，一为文官，一为武官，两人虽为清廷效力，但皆为清官，而且身为汉人，亦对满洲人欺压汉人而心感不愤。经过一段颇长日子的相处，“大东风”见两人品德端正，为官清廉，对自己礼待有加，且心系汉族，并非为虎作伥之人，就传两兄弟武功，并且透露，懂此门武功者，皆为反清义士，但此拳本无名，乃少林一脉，但少林功夫门路繁多，于散出少林后，便各自成一派，亦具派别名称。缘于本派功夫，既以反清复明为己任，当然会联络及组织各地之反凊组织（即初期之洪门等三合会），而本派暗语是“永言矢志，毋忘汉族，还我河山，大地回春”，为便以传于后世，遂将第一句“永言”合成一“咏”字，加上第四句最尾“春”字，以命名此一拳派，是为 “咏春”。何解第一句用首两字，而第四句只用最尾一字？因为“永言”合成的“咏”字，是一动词，创拳者们既身为明朝遗臣或子民，能够驱逐鞑子，还我河山，是为毕生最重要的事，所以“咏”的意思，就是告诫所有的人，要经常在心中吟咏那四句的暗语，勉励自己，不可或忘。

Pao Fa Lien Wing Chun ( 刨花蓮詠春)Lineage

This style of Wing Chun is a shaolin system which came from the north. During the revolutions against the Manchurians, a shaolin monk (少林和尚), nicknamed Dai Dong Fung (大东风)(Great East Wind), while trying to escape arrest, came to the south. In the area of Qingyuan, Guangdong, he was made a guest by bothers named Tse Gok-Leung ( 谢国梁)& Tse Gok-Jeung(谢国樟) Of the two brothers, one was a literary mandarin while the other was a military mandarin. Even though they were working for the Manchurians, but since they were of the Han tribe, and seeing how their kinsmen were being mistreated, they had a hope that one day the Manchurians would be over thrown by the Hans. After a period of time, when the monk observed that these two brothers were decent people and not corrupted mandarins, and that they also treated him with honor and respect, he taught them Wing Chun. He also disclosed that all disciples of Wing Chun are revolutionists. Since this had been discovered by the Manchurian Court, so in order to hide identity, they broke down the two characters "Wing Chun" into a secret three lined poem. That is: "Wing Yin Chi Ji" "永言矢志" (Always speak with determination), "Mo Mong Hong Juk" "毋忘汉族"(Don't forget the Han Nation), "Dai Day Wu Chun" "大地回春"(Spring will be back again).

most people know where did bruce lee learn his wing chun from, but nobody really know where did yik kam learn his incomplete wing chun? where did yik kam learn his o-mei? who was yik kam's o-mei teacher? where did yik kam learn his crane? which crane school and who was his teacher? once again, you can't give us any details to back up your claims.

hendrik, where are your answers?

RB93SAAT

12-31-2010, 08:43 PM

So, for those who keep postulate wanting to seperate Yik Kam lineage from other WCK lineages for their own agenda to change history, by evident, they have no chance. and it is time to question the motivation behind them.

o-mei 12 zheung is for health execise, not an fighting art. wing chun kung fu is designed for fighting. you can keep on blowing hot air with your rediculous claims, it would not change this fact o-mei 12 zheung is just a simple set of health execises.

Hendrik

12-31-2010, 09:43 PM

o-mei 12 zheung is for health execise, not an fighting art. wing chun kung fu is designed for fighting.

you can keep on blowing hot air with your rediculous claims, it would not change this fact o-mei 12 zheung is just a simple set of health execises.

This is a problem when one is making claim on something one totally dont know what it is.

Hendrik

12-31-2010, 09:47 PM

刨花蓮詠春一脈來源：

少林寺被清廷所毁，寺僧便四散逃走，有散于北方其他地方，亦有南下广东，福建等地，一名绰号“ 大东风”之少林和尚（真姓名及法号已没有提起，因避清廷耳目之故，而“大东风”的意思，在当时中国民间有俗语所谓“唔好东风搅坏天”，借用其意即要造反）逃到广东，遇到两名兄弟并被收容，兄叫谢国梁，弟叫谢国樟，袓籍西樵，单灶谢，一为文官，一为武官，两人虽为清廷效力，但皆为清官，而且身为汉人，亦对满洲人欺压汉人而心感不愤。经过一段颇长日子的相处，“大东风”见两人品德端正，为官清廉，对自己礼待有加，且心系汉族，并非为虎作伥之人，就传两兄弟武功，并且透露，懂此门武功者，皆为反清义士，但此拳本无名，乃少林一脉，但少林功夫门路繁多，于散出少林后，便各自成一派，亦具派别名称。缘于本派功夫，既以反清复明为己任，当然会联络及组织各地之反凊组织（即初期之洪门等三合会），而本派暗语是“永言矢志，毋忘汉族，还我河山，大地回春”，为便以传于后世，遂将第一句“永言”合成一“咏”字，加上第四句最尾“春”字，以命名此一拳派，是为 “咏春”。何解第一句用首两字，而第四句只用最尾一字？因为“永言”合成的“咏”字，是一动词，创拳者们既身为明朝遗臣或子民，能够驱逐鞑子，还我河山，是为毕生最重要的事，所以“咏”的意思，就是告诫所有的人，要经常在心中吟咏那四句的暗语，勉励自己，不可或忘。

Pao Fa Lien Wing Chun ( 刨花蓮詠春)Lineage

This style of Wing Chun is a shaolin system which came from the north. During the revolutions against the Manchurians, a shaolin monk (少林和尚), nicknamed Dai Dong Fung (大东风)(Great East Wind), while trying to escape arrest, came to the south. In the area of Qingyuan, Guangdong, he was made a guest by bothers named Tse Gok-Leung ( 谢国梁)& Tse Gok-Jeung(谢国樟) Of the two brothers, one was a literary mandarin while the other was a military mandarin. Even though they were working for the Manchurians, but since they were of the Han tribe, and seeing how their kinsmen were being mistreated, they had a hope that one day the Manchurians would be over thrown by the Hans. After a period of time, when the monk observed that these two brothers were decent people and not corrupted mandarins, and that they also treated him with honor and respect, he taught them Wing Chun. He also disclosed that all disciples of Wing Chun are revolutionists. Since this had been discovered by the Manchurian Court, so in order to hide identity, they broke down the two characters "Wing Chun" into a secret three lined poem. That is: "Wing Yin Chi Ji" "永言矢志" (Always speak with determination), "Mo Mong Hong Juk" "毋忘汉族"(Don't forget the Han Nation), "Dai Day Wu Chun" "大地回春"(Spring will be back again).

hendrik, where are your answers?

1, Shao lin? Which Shao lin? who - with real name and trace able ? when? where? Evidents of trace in TCMA history?
go a head show the details instead of translate some story from a person or two without details.

We needs details as how the White Crane and Emei snake presented in different legitimate RED BOAT OPERA lineages of WCK.

2, The older WCK lineages and senior Fung Chun's Video clips have answered the questions of White Crane and and Emei snake, they do fine without me.

So, here on I am off the case.

RB93SAAT

12-31-2010, 10:50 PM

hendrik, you sound confused. was that because yik kam considered as an outsider so he couldn't possible be able to learn wing chun with leung yee tai from the same teacher? that might explain yik kam's slt was not original wing chun. seriouly take another look at the history of pao fa lien can help you to realize that your o-mei connection is a fantasy nothing more.

once again, why don't you answer these questions here?

why did yik kam go out to search other arts in order to fill in the missing pieces of his wing chun?
where and who did yik kam learn his o-mei from?
where and who did yik kam learn his crane from?
where and who did yik kam learn his snake from?

as most people know this fact, dai dung fung, yim wing chun, wong wah bo and leung yee tai and others all came before yik kam, so, from where and who and how could you replace yik kam story to the real history of wing chun coiming from dai dung fung and william cheung? from yim wing chun to wong wah bo, from chi sim to red boat members, from ip man to william cheung. in william cheung books clearly stated wing chun came from shaolin monastery. so, it's also safe to say that yik kam was happy with his own creation, yik kam slt is just yik kam slt, nothing more. only you hendrik turned it into fantasy.

LoneTiger108

01-01-2011, 04:31 AM

I thought I might just add my ten pence worth here because I have heard something worth mentioning. Albeit just rumours or folklore, but it does make some kind of sense to me.

Hung Gun Biu 'may have been' the family name of Hung Hei Goon, who is credited with formalizing and spreading the art of Hung Gar. Therefore, he was a direct student of Jee Shim and it is also believed that these two Martial Artists sought refuge on the Red Boats.

http://www.hungkuen.net/masters-hungheigoon.htm

From my own research I can also say that the pole form I practise originated with one of Hung Hei Goons martial brothers who shared his knowledge of pole plays with people on the Red Boats, filtering down to Leung Yee Tai who Ip Family claim as the source of Wing Chun 6 point and half pole. He is also known to have lived in the same street as Wong Wah Bo and they both taught Leung Jan together in a 'new' martial art when they retired from the Red Boats.

The 'idea' of this union was made famous by the movie Prodigal Son.

All of this also points this specific lineage to Shaolin (if only briefly!) since Jee Shim is said to have taught Hung Hei Goon while he was staying at the Southern temple, perhaps again just a 'pit stop' to seek refuge. And on all counts I am really only talking of my connection regarding pole plays. It is common knowledge that the 6 1/2 pole was 'inherited' from another style, and it is Hung Gar that was more prominent with the pole in those days as far as I'm aware. It simply makes sense, no?

I also find it very interesting that from people in Hung Kuen I have talked to there seemed to be a big divide in people practising the short and long bridge systems, even going as far to suggest that the short bridge system was lost, especailly after Wong Fei Hung become very very famous throughout China. Due to his tall, slim build he perpetuated the long bridge system.

Now I'm not saying that this is fact, but again it makes sense that Wing Chun must have existed prior to the Red Boats and may have been very heavily influenced by Hung Gar practitioners whilst on the Red Boats. This too adds to the mystery as Hung Gar is also known for its many forms and sets and especially it's way of transmitting knowledge through kuit, or martial poems. All of which seems very intriguing since I have yet to see evidence of the kuit existing before the Red Boats, and during this time maybe the 'Original' Wing Chun received an overhaul and one form became three and other two man sets and loose hand techniques were also introduced.

Just something to reflect on and needs some more serious research too imho, especially because I really know very little about anything before the Red Boat as this too is very strongly represented in my own learning due to my Sifu and his family being one of the last troupes of Canton Opera performers and musicians to 'see' some of the older generations practising in the fields on the New Territories in HK! I also found some great information on Hung Kuen in their own family museum which is based in the same ancestral park as Ip Mans Tong in Foshan/Fatsan. The Ip Family were granted the space because of the close relationship between the two styles.

Well, that's my New Year gift to you all! ;):rolleyes::D

I guess that nobody really cares for 'another view'? And I thought that maybe a new year would bring in decent exchange of ideas but all I see is people talking over eachother!

I think its pointless asking Hendrik anything about Wing Chun prior to Yik Kam as all he is concerned with is how his root has influenced everyone elses with the snake & crane, which does make sense if you haven't secured a Shaolin connection.

But I have tried to highlight how this is possible without the intervention of Yik Kam or Pao Fa Lien so what do you all think?

I really think that the Red Boats are an important turning point for Wing Chun but I also have to clear some misinformation about their purpose. We were not and are not rebels! There were literally hundreds of troupes and to put us all in the gangsta category is wrong. As far as I'm aware this revolutionary behaviour stopped with Jee Shim and Hung Hei Goon. And FWIW I don't think anyone on this forum has unravelled the true history of Wing Chun because they simply can't.

We can all speculate and try to use elders like Fong Chun to try to prove a point but show me a clip of him talking of Yik Kam and Omei snake?! Fact is even Fong Chun has his own stories. Nothing is 100% reliable so we should just get on with training and appreciate eachothers research and inherited folklores!

Hendrik

01-01-2011, 05:38 AM

I guess that nobody really cares for 'another view'? And I thought that maybe a new year would bring in decent exchange of ideas but all I see is people talking over eachother!

It is not about "another view" it is one needs to present something which is making sense. instead of just "another view".

And to present something which is making sense needs to have a clear understanding one what is going on, instead of presenting goship news paper information or something out of the blue.

I think its pointless asking Hendrik anything about Wing Chun prior to Yik Kam as all he is concerned with is how his root has influenced everyone elses with the snake & crane, which does make sense if you haven't secured a Shaolin connection.

I have present what WCK prior to Yik Kam independent of Yik Kam in my previous posts.
in fact, my view is not about Yik Kam WCK but a commondinominator of Koo Lo, YKS , YiK Kam....

As I clarify it again and again, Yik Kam's evidents on crane and snake is only an evidents within many evidents from the older WCK lineages pointing to Crane and Snake.

I really think that the Red Boats are an important turning point for Wing Chun but I also have to clear some misinformation about their purpose. We were not and are not rebels!

There were literally hundreds of troupes and to put us all in the gangsta category is wrong.

As far as I'm aware this revolutionary behaviour stopped with Jee Shim and Hung Hei Goon. And FWIW I don't think anyone on this forum has unravelled the true history of Wing Chun because they simply can't.

My suggestion for you is to verify the likely within the TCMA history and also the TCMA signature possibilities on the above. It is not an every put their 5 cents deal. It is does one says has any possibilities issue.

We can all speculate and try to use elders like Fong Chun to try to prove a point but show me a clip of him talking of Yik Kam and Omei snake?!

No one speculate, no one try to use the elders like Fong Chun. No need to prove a point. Not even needed to talking of Yik Kam, in fact, No one talking Yik Kam.

senior Fung Chun is performing a signature of Emei 12 Zhuang that is the reality and fact.

Fact is even Fong Chun has his own stories. Nothing is 100% reliable so we should just get on with training and appreciate eachothers research and inherited folklores!

The Fact is senior Fung Chun is perfomring a signature of Emei 12 zhuang, while Fung's WCK is a direct teaching of Leong Jan. and Between Leong and him is only one generation. KooLo is a village which is known for conservatively preserve Leong Jan's WCK.

We talk evidents instead of speculation.

I really suggest you read my previous posts comprehend them and make sure you understand what I say before posting your ideas about them.

LoneTiger108

01-01-2011, 06:40 AM

It is not about "another view" it is one needs to present something which is making sense. instead of just "another view".

And to present something which is making sense needs to have a clear understanding one what is going on, instead of presenting goship news paper information or something out of the blue.

Firstly, what I presented isn't from gossip in a newspaper. It's folklore stories that have been passed to me verbally, like 99.9% of all other students here that's what I have to go on and research further.

My suggestion for you is to verify the likely within the TCMA history and also the TCMA signature possibilities on the above. It is not an every put their 5 cents deal. It is does one says has any possibilities issue.

If you want to clarify the history of the Red Boats you will have major issues as again it's all based on verbal transmissions. I suggest you look into Canton Opera as it's a very good starting point.

No one speculate, no one try to use the elders like Fong Chun. No need to prove a point. Not even needed to talking of Yik Kam, in fact, No one talking Yik Kam.

senior Fung Chun is performing a signature of Emei 12 Zhuang that is the reality and fact.

Yes it is all speculation imho. Stories from Fung Chun and how he performs his forms with an emei signature is all speculation because he has not said that himself. Or are yuo saying that he, the eldest descendant of Wing Chun today, does not know that he is doing Emei?

That's YOUR fact Hendrik. Not his. He is just rotating his huensau seed, as most of us elder families do. In fact, Mak Yiu Mings SLT from Cheung Bo must also be emei according to you then?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4O3KnlSlCY

But it isn't. It is simply the Cheung Bo salutation and very common in the Fatsan Wing Chun from Chiu Wan. FWIW They also have the same opening as Lee Shing family, albeit slightly hidden or minimized.

In other families they call this signature Sap Jee Sau
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaQPLgTgqkw&feature=related

The Fact is senior Fung Chun is perfomring a signature of Emei 12 zhuang, while Fung's WCK is a direct teaching of Leong Jan. and Between Leong and him is only one generation. KooLo is a village which is known for conservatively preserve Leong Jan's WCK.

We talk evidents instead of speculation.

And all evidence suggests that Leung Jan was 70 years old when he started teaching the Kulo methods we see today. 70 years old!! Retired and only capable of teaching a point method of sansau techniques. ALL great stuff though and not to be forgotten, but really, where do you think he taught as much as he could?? It reminds me of young students attempting to copy Ip Mans videos. Young men training like old men. Wing Chun is not supposed to be like that imo.

FWIW I totally understand where you're coming from Hendrik and I do appreciate you sharing your knowledge of the 12 Zhuang of Emei and your evidence (if we can call it that) of its connection to Wing Chun. The thing is, others have other evidence. Other stories, just as you do, that point the finger in different directions than you.

Everything is worth researching IMHO but we must also spend time training so we can familiarize ourselves with eachother. This I'm afraid is where all exchange stops. We don't train together. We don't meet eachother.

I only hope this year doesn't become another 'bash eachother' period in Wing Chuns history, because that is what we're doing here. We're creating history with every post we make and I for one would like to see everyone make an effort to get along.

Man, I would even like to get out at some point and meet up with as many of you as I can!! But I'm like a Vampire. I only come into your house if I'm invited :D

Hendrik

01-01-2011, 07:15 AM

He is just rotating his huensau seed, as most of us elder families do.

In fact, Mak Yiu Mings SLT from Cheung Bo must also be emei according to you then?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s4O3KnlSlCY

But it isn't.

It is simply the Cheung Bo salutation and very common in the Fatsan Wing Chun from Chiu Wan.

In other families they call this signature Sap Jee Sau
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AaQPLgTgqkw&feature=related

Great, if it is not emei ,

the fact is some one is doing an Emei signature , which use for finger Jin conditioning as in emei.

and that doesnt have to according to me but they have done it.
any explaination where is those signature is from?

why is it the Emei signature is practiced in WCK and use for Finger conditioning?

and if those signature is not Emei signature where that comes from? which style?

Saying it is or it isnt emei , doesnt mean anything in reality of existance but your opinion which is ok with me.

For some other WCner,

compare your clips with emei 12 zhuang's practice, Emei a 800 years old art of TCMA.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKASkDfmV9g

Starting 4.37

for them,
your example in the clips has just further confirm the influence of Emei in WCK is much broader then most think.

Now tell us, why and where is this DNA/signature which appear in different WCK lineages comes from in the past 400 years of TCMA?

WCK is caugt solidly using Emei's finger training technology here.

again, it is not about winning an arguement or whose lineage is better,

it is about HOW a move done properly to activate the power and the significant behind it which is I am interested in.
That is my botton line in the history research as I repeatly tell the world which you probably not comprehend.

Is this move from Shao lin Hung Gar's Hung Hei Goon as you suggested? May be you are right, it is Hung Hei Goon's signature.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDTniv8PuW0

See it for yourself.

LoneTiger108

01-01-2011, 07:37 AM

your example in the clip has just further confirm the influence of Emei in WCK is much broader then most think.

Now tell us, where is this signature which appear in different WCK lineages comes from in the past 400 years of TCMA?

That's one for Chiu Wans family I think as it's his students that are doing that set specifically. And we used to have a few guys on here from that neck of the woods but I aint seen them post in a while.

They will be able to explain what the set is and maybe even where it comes from much better than me (or you!) As I've said, my understanding is very simple. It's an expression of huensau. I actually do similar movments at the start of my Chum Kiu and Biu Jee forms, but they become much much faster and more powerful looking using the seed and energies I am familiar with. These sets are never shown beyond a simple taigik understanding, which is a shame.

As I've also said, I'm not interested in who says they have an original anyhthing because I don't believe we will ever know the truth behind our ancestral heritage. You will 'feel' if what you do makes sense. If its natural. If you blossom year after year. If you yourself feel that youthfulness inside you.

That's all we should all aim for imho. Just train well and be happy for 2011 Hendrik and maybe we will be able to move forwards instead of backwards to the days of bickering and insults.

LoneTiger108

01-01-2011, 07:46 AM

Is this move from Shao lin Hung Gar's Hung Hei Goon as you suggested? May be you are right, it is Hung Hei Goon's signature.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDTniv8PuW0

See it for yourself.

Great clip by the way!!

This is from Tid Kiu Sam though (real name Leung Gwan), not Hung Hei Goon.

http://www.hungkuen.net/masters-tidkiusam.htm

I'm glad you find my Hung Gar connection to Wing Chun interesting. But as I've suggested, this does need some more serious research too. I was hoping that Robert may have some inside knowledge here, as he practised Hung Kuen didn't he? I haven't, but I have a lot of respect for the pratitioners I have met here in the UK amd HK.

Hendrik

01-01-2011, 07:52 AM

That's one for Chiu Wans family I think as it's his students that are doing that set specifically. And we used to have a few guys on here from that neck of the woods but I aint seen them post in a while.

They will be able to explain what the set is and maybe even where it comes from much better than me (or you!) As I've said, my understanding is very simple. It's an expression of huensau. I actually do similar movments at the start of my Chum Kiu and Biu Jee forms, but they become much much faster and more powerful looking using the seed and energies I am familiar with. These sets are never shown beyond a simple taigik understanding, which is a shame.

As I've also said, I'm not interested in who says they have an original anyhthing because I don't believe we will ever know the truth behind our ancestral heritage. You will 'feel' if what you do makes sense. If its natural. If you blossom year after year. If you yourself feel that youthfulness inside you.

That's all we should all aim for imho. Just train well and be happy for 2011 Hendrik and maybe we will be able to move forwards instead of backwards to the days of bickering and insults.

There is nothing to do with who has original anything . It got to do of where those Signature is from. it got to comes from somewhere.

From, Shao lin Hung Gar as you suggest Jee Shim and Hung Hei Gun? Emei 12 Zhuang? Ngo Cho KUen? ..... all ideas are fine with me, let's look at what is the most likely from every angle.

1-1-11, the can of snake is opened. that is what has happen via your clips. Thanks!

Hendrik

01-01-2011, 07:55 AM

Great clip by the way!!

This is from Tid Kiu Sam though (real name Leung Gwan), not Hung Hei Goon.

http://www.hungkuen.net/masters-tidkiusam.htm

I'm glad you find my Hung Gar connection to Wing Chun interesting. But as I've suggested, this does need some more serious research too. I was hoping that Robert may have some inside knowledge here, as he practised Hung Kuen didn't he? I haven't, but I have a lot of respect for the pratitioners I have met here in the UK amd HK.

Great, keep the research going. Open it up and see which fits. I am supporting it 100 percent.

KPM

01-01-2011, 08:36 AM

Hey JP:

----I agologize if I have "assumed too much about your reading skills." But I can only go by what you wrote in the post I was responding to.

---You wrote that Hendrik was the ONLY person that supported his theory. I pointed out that I had posted previously in this same thread saying I agreed with the basic premise. I guess you chose to ignore that so that you could attack Hendrik, rather than missing it?

You wrote:
There you go 'ass'uming to know what I missed again...No sh!t things change.
Of course there are common origins! Who the hell said otherwise?

---You were the one that asked in your previous post: "If all WC came from White Crane/Emei as we see them today, why are they so vastly different from WC?" You wrote "AS WE SEE THEM TODAY." I pointed out that what we were talking about was a common ancestor, not what we see today. So who's reading skills are in question? :confused:

FWIW, we can't compare any arts 'as they were a long time ago' because really, no one really knows what they were back then

---We are talking about THEORY of historical origins. So what else do we have to go on? Anthropologists do this all the time when looking for connections and common origins for cultural groups. It is a valid way of constructing theories of historical origins. The use of Occam's Razor plans a large part. But I'm sure you caught that in my prior posts! You have to go with what seems the most plausible from the limited resources or evidence on hand.

The only thing that can be compared are the arts as they are today.

---Exactly. The same way in which Anthropologists look at cultures that exist today and what more recent history is known about them. This is part of how Anthropologists have constructed a theory of an Indo-European group being the origin of several seemingly unrelated modern cultures.

How do you know how much White Crane has evolved? You don't. Guessing what they all might have looked like 200 years ago, or assuming that they even evolved to such sever degree that they don't look anything like they did in 1850 is a waste of time. Why? no proof - It's all guessing.

---That's why is called a THEORY.

But that is exactly what Hendrik does time and again. He even goes as far to say that WCK today has lost a whole bunch of 'stuffs' and that he is able to reconstruct it from old text. Don't you see how silly this is?

---I could be wrong, but if I remember correctly, Hendrik has posited what he sees as "missing pieces" in most WCK based upon what he has seen his teacher do compared to what others do, as well as what he has seen in some other mainland styles of WCK. I'm not saying I agree with his findings. But his motivation is more than just reading something in old texts, and is not quite as silly as you make it out to be.

But who can guess what the 'real WCK' looked like 200 years ago? No one.

----You're wrong. All WCK shares common elements. Some lineages have more elements in common than others. These common elements came from a common source. By looking at these "high percentage" elements and these elements that make all WCK fit the definition of actual "Wing Chun", we can have a pretty good idea of what that original root method looked like. Again, this is a common line of research in Anthropology.

Hey, I've got an idea - White Crane originally came from WCK and that's why they look the same! Can you prove me wrong? ;)

---No. But can you prove us wrong? Most WCK lineages share an origin myth that says that WCK came about after the founder witnessed a fight between an snake and a crane. Do you know of any White Crane origination myths that say it came from Wing Chun? Again, in constructing theories we have to go with Occam's Razor. What seems more plausible?

Because he has some theories doesn't make them 'fact', regardless who might agree with him.

---But wait! You said previously that NO ONE agreed with him! That's a little different!

The only issue I have is when some people come here and pretend they have some inside knowledge that something is vastly missing in all of today's wing chun, and that only they have the answers or keys for unlocking those missing secrets. :rolleyes: Unless you also believe this to be true?

---No, I don't believe that to be true. And I agree with your last statement to some extent. So challenge Hendrik on those points! Make him back up the "factual" statements that he seems to make that go beyond the bounds of "theory." Outline your own theory and evidence that you feel is more plausible. Don't just completely ignore someone else (me) who has made an effort to show that the basic theory has some foundation....whether you agree with the theory or not.

KPM

01-01-2011, 08:58 AM

once again, why don't you answer these questions here?

why did yik kam go out to search other arts in order to fill in the missing pieces of his wing chun?
where and who did yik kam learn his o-mei from?
where and who did yik kam learn his crane from?
where and who did yik kam learn his snake from?

.

Wow! You guys seem really dense! :eek: How many times does one have to state something in a single thread before it seeks in? Hendrik never said that Yik Kam WCK was the original ancestoral WCK! Yik Kam didn't learn o-mei, crane, or snake. He learned WCK! The theory is that the WCK he learned had been heavily influenced by, if not derived from, those other arts. Those elements were then assembled, combined, and used in a new way to become WCK. WCK did not spring forth from a vacuum! Its developers were all experienced martial artists. Who those original developers were is not clear. The theory is simply looking at what the likely foundational methods may have been.

Hendrik

01-01-2011, 09:01 AM

Wow! You guys seem really dense! :eek: How many times does one have to state something in a single thread before it seeks in? Hendrik never said that Yik Kam WCK was the original ancestoral WCK! Yik Kam didn't learn o-mei, crane, or snake. He learned WCK! The theory is that the WCK he learned had been heavily influenced by, if not derived from, those other arts. Those elements were then assembled, combined, and used in a new way to become WCK. WCK did not spring forth from a vacuum! Its developers were all experienced martial artists. Who those original developers were is not clear. The theory is simply looking at what the likely foundational methods may have been.

Yup. That is correct.

and knowing those foundatonal methods could benifit us greatly to know what result is possible while practicing it especially while doing the sets.

For example, Pak by definition is achived a result similar to "fire craker" a localization blast to dissolve or cancel or disarm the resistance. Pak is not a bunker missile which penetrate deep down to 100 feet. according to the ancient definition.

So, while doing pak the entire body is not behind it because it is no need to and not efficient since Pak is a "clearing" tool. and the nature of the power type become ackward with lot of power behind it. Similar to slaping some one's cheek with the whole body swinging is not a slap any more or causing one's body to twise more then neccesary, also, one doesnt need to power a fire craker with neuclear core and have a 0.001 % conversion efficientcy which is a waste of energy.

In most case, the Bunker missile is used simulatiously with the Pak to furthr rupture the structure or drive through the body, the entire body thus is behind this Bunker missile then the Pak. Pak's explosion doesnt move forward but at spot. thus, if the entire body is behind it, the penetration will only happen at the blast spot/location. the entire body is behind the bunker missile which needs to do penetration.

Not knowing this and thinking use Pak with entire body is not accord to ancient definition of the tool. like using a sweeper as hammer. That is not accord with WCK. However, using a Sweeper as lead or in the same time with the Hammer is a great combination and it is no longer just a pure Pak.

Why to know this is important? because it effect the effectiveness, efficiency and also the structure of one, such as which leg is power the pak... . one needs to know what is the tool is and what is it for. Sure, after that one could evolve. It is just the story of Momentum handling -- what are they and how to be effective and efficient.

Hendrik

01-01-2011, 10:24 AM

---I could be wrong, but if I remember correctly, Hendrik has posited what he sees as "missing pieces" in most WCK based upon what he has seen his teacher do compared to what others do, as well as what he has seen in some other mainland styles of WCK. I'm not saying I agree with his findings. But his motivation is more than just reading something in old texts, and is not quite as silly as you make it out to be.

Just to be rational, one can check the five finger tracing taiji or the emei signature of Fung Chun in all the present Cho family SLT sets in the youtube and there is no such signature there.

Why? IMHHHHO, because in the evolution of past 160 years, things get lost via carelessness. ir unaware of.. changes....etc. human stuffs.

So here is a case where something other old lineages are still preserving but the general Cho family SLT is missing or they forgotten where is that move is or get fuzzy about it. So, yes, Even the Cho family could have missing components.

Thus, it is not about claiming Yik Kam lineage have it all but a search of what is it there possible for General WCK. There is no such thing as KNOW IT ALL.

So, why do I make such a big fuzz on this? because this five finger tracing taiji is the closing and biujee is the opening of Qi flow medirians and one needs both to be a holistic balance practice. and when one is missing then there is an issue.

Also, there is a purpose why the wraping of finger started with the pinky and continuous on sequence, instead of just make a fist randomly. Take a look, how other art doesnt pay this much attention to these details.

the emei kuen kuit said

屈指描太极, bending the finger to trace the taiji circle
小指居先次第行, pinky is the lead and other fingers go with sequece.

It is in such a details and layer and layers of inspection one needs to observe when it comes with the details of SLT or WCK -- missed an inch off a thousand miles.

hunt1

01-01-2011, 11:46 AM

[
QUOTE=RB93SAAT;1070139]pao fa lien wing chun this lineage is said to have its roots in the shaolin monastery and was taught by a buddhist monk whose nickname was Big East Wind (大东风). on leaving the shaolin monastery Dai Dung Fung (大东风)travelled south to canton. the buddhist monk was a member of a secret society whose aims were to overthrow the Ching Government.

RB93Saat. This story of Pao fa Lien origin is highly dubious and comes from Mok Poi On.

The last 2 living direct students of Pao Fa Lien Gwok Gai and Gwok Siu. ( I belive Gwok Gai died in the last few years). They said they never heard this story from their teacher Pao Fa Lien. That to their knowledge their wing chun came from the same source as all other wing chun.

KPM

01-01-2011, 11:49 AM

[

A general question. Why the hostility to Hendrik's theory of wing chun origins? Does anyone believe wing chun just appeared one day as a complete ready to go system? Some one or group of someones developed the system drawing upon their knowledge of martial arts as source material.

Almost all Wing Chun has the crane and snake story as an origin myth. It is clear white crane kung fu influenced the development of several arts from SPM to karate. To say that is the crane and Emei snake is the snake side doesn't seem far fetched.

More importantly does it really matter or change anything in what you do? Right or wrong Hendriks origin theory is at least as strong if not stronger than any others that have been put out. Put something else out or ignore it completely its just a mental exercise no need to get bent out of shape or feel threatened.

Thank you for your response! I'm glad to see someone else here that can use logical reasoning and common sense! ;)

Hendrik

01-01-2011, 01:27 PM

I like to share openly technically. Do I have shortcoming, sure lots of them, and not like to defend them but improve.

One thing sometimes people dont understand is that I avoid to answer some technical questions and tell other to Baisi. The facts are lots of things needs lots of time and repeatable drill to know what it is. it is better to learn from those who has experience to coach one.

As the so called Snake engine, The Sup jee Sau above is the snake engine. look how close it is to the Siu Jee Zhuang of Emei 12 Zhuang Russell did in his clip.

So, WCK has it there embeded.

So, what is these WCK Sap Jee Sau stuffs is good for in this New Age? Sup Jee Sau practice is an excellent practice for us modern people who use computer and sitting in the cubicle.

Those who has shoulder, arm wrist, finger problem could be corrected if one practice three times a day and each time 3 sets or more. Try it and see for yourself. do it without using any force, just use enough force to smoothly move the arm and fingers with very loose muscle that it feels like the whole arm and shoulder is "floating" in the air. Yes, That lite. when one feel heavy that is the part one tense up. Lite is an important key to activate the snake engine. Tensing or dynamic tension will not activate the snake engine.

So, it must be practiced with "no" effort at all. and after a day or two see how magic surface. But if one do it with tension, the magic will not surface. because this is not a physical exercise but more.... That is the levitation I am talking , it is loose and exanding. it is not loose and sinking where lots of people mistaken via the misunderstood on rooting and sinking. Loose and sinking is not a nuetra state it is an application state. Nuetra state needs to be in loose and exanding. the whole SLT has to be based in this state and then call out different application state. instead of sitting in the loose and sinking application state. That wont work.

Making use of the Sap Jee Sau or SLT this way daily in one's office cubicle is much much pratical and benificial then go fighting.

On the other hand, I am not talking Figthing. Why? because I have seen some Kuit which perscribe different types of very damaging Jin.

IE: Jin which blown the back where the strike hit in the front of the body. and ...etc.

Look, these stuff are not macho stuffs. One step wrong or accident no one knows how to undo it. the consequence is huge. I am not going to promote those stuffs for fun play as some one take sparing is. When one sometimes is naive enough to want to test out things like that knowing not its consequence.

general WCK, has been modified after 1850, IMHO, because those type of Jin got remove from the Set. if one know where they are and comparing the old and new sets structure of Leong Jan's derive WCK, IMHO.

I dont know why Leong Jan remove those things but my common sense is he must knows something is not for fun and those stuffs are very damaging.

In addition, Also, my late sifu GM CHC eventhough was very famous for Kong Sao has warn me on the consequence of fighting cause body damage.

Thus, I choose not to go to those fighting topic.

Great power comes with lots of responsibility, and sometimes we need to give up the ego to do what is right. IMHO

Wayfaring

01-02-2011, 10:38 AM

So, what is these WCK Sap Jee Sau stuffs is good for in this New Age? Sup Jee Sau practice is an excellent practice for us modern people who use computer and sitting in the cubicle.
IMHO

So to sum up - in your opinion, WCK is effective in the New Age to help you train to be a keyboard warrior?

Beautiful.

t_niehoff

01-02-2011, 10:41 AM

I dont know why Leong Jan remove those things but my common sense is he must knows something is not for fun and those stuffs are very damaging.

Maybe, just maybe, Leung Jan did what all fighters do, hack away at the inessentials.

t_niehoff

01-02-2011, 10:48 AM

Hendrik

01-02-2011, 02:06 PM

My view is that this didn't occur intentionally, as some planned invention of some new art.

I don't think arts ever develop that way -- or can.

I think it was unstructured, unplanned, and organic, growing out of their fighting.

1, Human are strongly influence by their environment and their past training.

2, Check into the patent office to see the so called invention: how many revolution within per 10000 evolution. That is the reality.

3, When a person who was train with the Snake art and inspire by the White crane to created a new art, the prio-art influence is there big time.

4, what is the chance for one to accidentaly decide to wrap their finger into a fist and starts with the pinky? and what is the chance lineages of older WCK branches practicing the same move of wraping finger into a fist starting with the pinky and practice that for past 150 years?

Go and scan ALL the So called Shao lin art for past 1000 years, (yes, one thousand years ) and see which Shao LIn art wrap their fingers to make fist that way?

5, In the Legend, MIu Shun had admit what he taught Yim Yee or Yim WC's father is not the White Crane but a fusion of White crane and his own art. Eventhough he did not reveal the name of the art he is practicing.

For me, there is no accident and human are much subject to influence then just Grow into something.

tigershorty

01-02-2011, 02:31 PM

hendrik, i'm sorry but...maybe you should read this and understand why some people aren't following your verbose posts.

http://www.iusb.edu/~libg/pdf/critical-reading.pdf

Hendrik

01-02-2011, 02:49 PM

hendrik, i'm sorry but...maybe you should read this and understand why some people aren't following your verbose posts.

http://www.iusb.edu/~libg/pdf/critical-reading.pdf

Thank you!

and that is fine with whether some people follow or not.

KPM

01-02-2011, 03:20 PM

Above, you wrote that "Those elements were then assembled, combined, and used in a new way to become WCK." My view is that this didn't occur intentionally, as some planned invention of some new art. I don't think arts ever develop that way -- or can. I think it was unstructured, unplanned, and organic, growing out of their fighting. And they may have taken various aspects from various curriculum to teach their new method.

That could very well be true! I have no problem with that idea. :) Maybe one of them had learned Crane and found some short-comings in his knowledge when he tried to fight with it. So he made changes. Maybe he added some "snake" components and found it more workable. It does seem very possible that no one person set out purposefully to develop a new fighting style that would be called "Wing Chun." Then again, Bruce Lee found short-comings in his "foundation art" and set out to explore other methods that could make up for those short-comings. I guess one could argue whether his goal was to create a new "style", but I think it was. Why would martial artists 150 years ago be any different?

tigershorty

01-02-2011, 03:31 PM

he also went back and said he should have never created JKD (to wong shun leung). there are always 'shortcomings' to any non-exact science (like fighting)

maybes really don't cut it.

Hendrik

01-02-2011, 03:35 PM

Whatever the reasons, that is ok.

The bottom line for me is via the ancestor's legend we have identify something very likely to be the elements.

And, using those elements, one could take a closer look at the core of the art.

Eric_H

01-02-2011, 05:48 PM

Hendrik

01-02-2011, 06:16 PM

If you like to believe what you post, that is fine with me. I am open with anyone like to believe anything.

For me, my botton line of WCK history research is simply Cracking the Operation Code of WCK's technology for myself. and I have completed the task.

I share with the world what I have found and what could be the result. As who likes it who dont who love it who against it that is fine with me, That is not my concern from the Cracking technology code stand point. It doesnt matter.

As I said in the previous post, I am ok with and respect every one's choice. For my mission is completed and I am free. If others who like the path I have taken and need my further sharing that is fine with me, otherwise, it is also fine with me.

Hey Hendrik,

-William Cheung says in his Siu Nim Tao book that Yip Man's WC is descended from the Shaolin temple.
-Pan Nam considered WC to be a mixture of shaolin and wudang arts.
-Pao Fa Lien is supposedly descended from the Shaolin temple.
-Richard Lowenhagen, a wing chun researcher who has written a number of articles and a book on Wing Chun says it is descended from the Shaolin temple.
-The Vietnamese branches of WC all claim to be a shaolin descendant.
-The VTM has written articles that Wing Chun comes from Shaolin.
-Ng Mui - by legend was supposedly a Shaolin monk/priestess.

From all "Legitimate" WC we can see that there is a Shaolin tie-in. Then there's the fact that WC has:

- Butterfly swords - a notably Shaolin weapon
- Wooden Dummy, a common feature of Shaolin descended martial arts
- Ties to Buddhism, a common hallmark of Shaolin descended martial arts.

That's straight up evidence.

How come all the other branches don't use o-mei exercises except for Yik Kam? How come Yik Kam only called his art Siu Lin Tao and not WCK?

Yik Kam's kung fu stands on its own (for Yik Kam only) as WCK basics + outside influences. It's what worked for him (likely because of his small size/weaker frame) but it is largely outside the "WCK curriculum" (T's term).

Is this horse dead yet, or do you still feel the need to hit it more?

tigershorty

01-02-2011, 06:41 PM

you do understand, tho...that when you say you've "cracked the operation code"

that it:

A) means nothing. you haven't clearly defined operation code.

B) you can't just say that without any proof (even Eric_H's "evidence" is circumstantial)
I believe I read that you don't even fight with your wing chun, making it virtually impossible to prove.

C) people will question why you say you have the answer, if you're unwillingly to actually discuss it without any actual detail or sensibly. If you teach wing chun for profit, it just comes off as a marketing tactic.

Hendrik

01-02-2011, 07:55 PM

I am not here to prove anything.
I have shared the possibilities path to ancient advance WCK free.

All the details are presented in front of one's eyes if one has the depth to know what it is.
Those who is interested and has the background will do their search. And I leave it to them to find out for themselve the treasure.

you do understand, tho...that when you say you've "cracked the operation code"

that it:

A) means nothing. you haven't clearly defined operation code.

B) you can't just say that without any proof (even Eric_H's "evidence" is circumstantial)
I believe I read that you don't even fight with your wing chun, making it virtually impossible to prove.

C) people will question why you say you have the answer, if you're unwillingly to actually discuss it without any actual detail or sensibly. If you teach wing chun for profit, it just comes off as a marketing tactic.

tigershorty

01-02-2011, 08:10 PM

Hendrik

01-02-2011, 08:12 PM

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bait-and-switch

Hahaha, I sell no product, I make no money, no school need to join, no T-shirt needs to buy,
and I even propose to all of you here that dont trust what I have post.

Do your own research and see for yourself what is the out come.

RB93SAAT

01-02-2011, 08:18 PM

hendrik, you can't back up your rediculous claim such as 'wing chun came from o-mei and crane.' most people know this fact, dai dung fung, yim wing chun, wong wah bo and leung yee tai and others all came before yik kam, so, from where and who and how could you replace yik kam story to the real history of wing chun coiming from dai dung fung and william cheung?

Yim Wing Chun:
SNT, CK, BJ

Dai Dung Fung:
SNT, CK, BJ

Pao Fa Lien Wing Chun:
SNT, CK, BJ

Wong Wah Bo
SNT, CK, BJ

Leung Yee Tai:
SNT, CK, BJ

Leung Jan:
SNT, CK, BJ (foshan version)
Ching San San Sau (guloo version)
Pin San San Sau (guloo version)

Yik Kam:
SLT (incomplete wc + o-mei + crane)

Bruce Lee:
JKD (ip man wc + mma)

why did yik kam go out to search other arts in order to fill in the missing pieces of his wing chun?
where and who did yik kam learn his o-mei from?
where and who did yik kam learn his crane from?
where and who did yik kam learn his snake from?

hendrik, i'm stilling waiting for your answers.

RB93SAAT

01-02-2011, 08:48 PM

Hahaha, I sell no product, I make no money, no school need to join, no T-shirt needs to buy,
and I even propose to all of you here that dont trust what I have post.

hendrik, for you...it's all about attention seeking!

Hendrik

01-02-2011, 09:20 PM

hahaha, who cares? I dont.

hendrik, you can't back up your rediculous claim such as 'wing chun came from o-mei and crane.' most people know this fact, dai dung fung, yim wing chun, wong wah bo and leung yee tai and others all came before yik kam, so, from where and who and how could you replace yik kam story to the real history of wing chun coiming from dai dung fung and william cheung?

Yim Wing Chun:
SNT, CK, BJ

Dai Dung Fung:
SNT, CK, BJ

Pao Fa Lien Wing Chun:
SNT, CK, BJ

Wong Wah Bo
SNT, CK, BJ

Leung Yee Tai:
SNT, CK, BJ

Leung Jan:
SNT, CK, BJ (foshan version)
Ching San San Sau (guloo version)
Pin San San Sau (guloo version)

Yik Kam:
SLT (incomplete wc + o-mei + crane)

Bruce Lee:
JKD (ip man wc + mma)

why did yik kam go out to search other arts in order to fill in the missing pieces of his wing chun?
where and who did yik kam learn his o-mei from?
where and who did yik kam learn his crane from?
where and who did yik kam learn his snake from?

hendrik, i'm stilling waiting for your answers.

Eric_H

01-02-2011, 09:29 PM

I share with the world what I have found and what could be the result. As who likes it who dont who love it who against it that is fine with me, That is not my concern from the Cracking technology code stand point. It doesnt matter.

Dude, the only thing cracked is what you're smoking. You've yet to answer any questions or make a good point.

Simply put nobody should care what you've "figured out" because you have nothing to share. Have you ever even applied your WC to a resisting opponent?

Maybe I'll give you a call if I ever have a problem with people gently pushing on me :rolleyes:

RB93SAAT

01-02-2011, 09:49 PM

Hey Hendrik,

-William Cheung says in his Siu Nim Tao book that Yip Man's WC is descended from the Shaolin temple.
-Pan Nam considered WC to be a mixture of shaolin and wudang arts.
-Pao Fa Lien is supposedly descended from the Shaolin temple.
-Richard Lowenhagen, a wing chun researcher who has written a number of articles and a book on Wing Chun says it is descended from the Shaolin temple.
-The Vietnamese branches of WC all claim to be a shaolin descendant.
-The VTM has written articles that Wing Chun comes from Shaolin.
-Ng Mui - by legend was supposedly a Shaolin monk/priestess.

From all "Legitimate" WC we can see that there is a Shaolin tie-in. Then there's the fact that WC has:

- Butterfly swords - a notably Shaolin weapon
- Wooden Dummy, a common feature of Shaolin descended martial arts
- Ties to Buddhism, a common hallmark of Shaolin descended martial arts.

That's straight up evidence. How come all the other branches don't use o-mei exercises except for Yik Kam? How come Yik Kam only called his art Siu Lin Tao and not WCK?

Yik Kam's kung fu stands on its own (for Yik Kam only) as WCK basics + outside influences. It's what worked for him (likely because of his small size/weaker frame) but it is largely outside the "WCK curriculum" (T's term).

Is this horse dead yet, or do you still feel the need to hit it more?

yik kum never claimed his own slt as wing chun, bruce lee also never called his jkd as wing chun. both yik kum and bruce lee were creators of their arts. it's all about hendrik's fantasy, it's really got nothing to do with yik kum at all. as a matter of fact, hendrik wants benny meng to vouch his o-mei and crane story badly, but according to taokum's report benny meng never trusted hendrik's false claims so far.

All this evidence on Omei doesn’t make sense to Santos his-story so he (Hendrik) is looking for shelter under Benny Meng. Looking to VTM to vouch his(Hendrik's) Omei opinion. I think Benny Meng is only interested in promoting 5 flag wing chun but even Benny Meng is having difficulty to vouch himself in the true martial arts community. 5 flag wing chun never exist in history. The real 5 flags society is well document as bandits.

KPM

01-03-2011, 07:07 AM

why did yik kam go out to search other arts in order to fill in the missing pieces of his wing chun?
where and who did yik kam learn his o-mei from?
where and who did yik kam learn his crane from?
where and who did yik kam learn his snake from?

hendrik, i'm stilling waiting for your answers.

You are really coming across as VERY DENSE!!! :eek: Did you miss this response to this when you posted it last time?

"Wow! You guys seem really dense! How many times does one have to state something in a single thread before it seeks in? Hendrik never said that Yik Kam WCK was the original ancestoral WCK! Yik Kam didn't learn o-mei, crane, or snake. He learned WCK! The theory is that the WCK he learned had been heavily influenced by, if not derived from, those other arts. Those elements were then assembled, combined, and used in a new way to become WCK. WCK did not spring forth from a vacuum! Its developers were all experienced martial artists. Who those original developers were is not clear. The theory is simply looking at what the likely foundational methods may have been."

And did you miss Hendrik's post when he agreed with what I said?

"Yup. That is correct. and knowing those foundatonal methods could benifit us greatly to know what result is possible while practicing it especially while doing the sets."

Hendrik and I gave you an answer! Maybe you should actually READ the thread if you are going to participate in it! :rolleyes:

KPM

01-03-2011, 07:23 AM

Hey Eric! I'm not Hendrik, but here is my 2 cents:

-William Cheung says in his Siu Nim Tao book that Yip Man's WC is descended from the Shaolin temple.
-Pao Fa Lien is supposedly descended from the Shaolin temple.
-Richard Lowenhagen, a wing chun researcher who has written a number of articles and a book on Wing Chun says it is descended from the Shaolin temple.
-The Vietnamese branches of WC all claim to be a shaolin descendant.
-The VTM has written articles that Wing Chun comes from Shaolin.

----Sure. That's part of the legend. But most of these sources would also pass on the origination myth stating that WCK developed after the founder saw a battle between and snake and a crane. So the Shaolin connection does not negate the idea that crane and snake may have been foundational arts. Doesn't Shaolin historically also do a version of crane and snake?

-Pan Nam considered WC to be a mixture of shaolin and wudang arts.

----That's because Pan Nam himself added these elements into his WCK!

-Ng Mui - by legend was supposedly a Shaolin monk/priestess.

----Sure. Wasn't Ng Mui supposed to be a Crane master? Wasn't Crane one of the Shaolin arts? But the myth states that Ng Mui developed WCK independent of the Shaolin Temple....not within its walls. So in the legends, Ng Mui represents a link to Shaolin, but that doesn't make WCK a "Shaolin art" itself.

From all "Legitimate" WC we can see that there is a Shaolin tie-in. Then there's the fact that WC has:

---A Shaolin tie-in is suggested by the legends. I have no problem acknowledging that. But to what extent was this Shaolin tie-in? We don't really know. The legends also suggest that crane and snake styles were foundational arts for the development of WCK. Why is that so hard to accept? Both are just theories.

- Butterfly swords - a notably Shaolin weapon
- Wooden Dummy, a common feature of Shaolin descended martial arts
- Ties to Buddhism, a common hallmark of Shaolin descended martial arts.

----I'll echo an argument used earlier in this thread....all of these things are found pretty commonly in Southern Chinese Martial Arts. Maybe the Dummy takes a different form from WCK's dummy, but other southern arts use some form of a dummy as well. So if the naysayers would discount very similar techniques and structure between Yong Shun White Crane and WCK as evidence because these similarities are supposedly in all southern arts, the same would have to be said for your evidence above.

That's straight up evidence.

---Not any more "straight up" than the evidence I have provided.

How come all the other branches don't use o-mei exercises except for Yik Kam?

---Hendrik has already pointed out o-mei elements in Ku Lo WCK....did you miss that? And if I recall, that same feature is part of Yuen Kay Shan WCK.

Is this horse dead yet, or do you still feel the need to hit it more?

---No. Its not dead if you think you have somehow disproven the basic theory that WCK evolved from foundational arts that may have been some form of Crane and Snake.

KPM

01-03-2011, 07:28 AM

yik kum never claimed his own slt as wing chun, bruce lee also never called his jkd as wing chun. both yik kum and bruce lee were creators of their arts.

---Before JKD was fully developed, Bruce Lee initially taught "Jun Fan Gung Fu" which is widely acknowledged as his own version of a "modified" Wing Chun. So, using your own analogy.....if Bruce Lee can do a version of WCK and call it "Jun Fan Gung Fu" why couldn't Yik Kam do a version of WCK and call it SLT?

Hendrik

01-03-2011, 08:20 AM

---Before JKD was fully developed, Bruce Lee initially taught "Jun Fan Gung Fu" which is widely acknowledged as his own version of a "modified" Wing Chun. So, using your own analogy.....if Bruce Lee can do a version of WCK and call it "Jun Fan Gung Fu" why couldn't Yik Kam do a version of WCK and call it SLT?

The story of Siu Lien Tau and Wing Chun according to the Cho family tradition is that

Before Miu Shun passed away, Miu Shun told his student Yim ( Yim WC's father).
The art Miu Shun had taught Yim is not White Crane but His own creation fusing White Crane with his own art. and Miu name it as Siu Lin Tau or the essential training of the small details.

Wing Chun kuen is a named give to an art which is using the Siu Lin Tau art , which was taught to the Red boat opera, as a core but evolve and create in the Red boat by the Red boat opera people.

So, Siu Lin Tau is not Wing Chun kuen but a core art prio to WCK development.

Beside the some kuen kuit's similarity with the Emei 12 Zhuang, the name Siu Lin Tau also reveal the likely hood of Emei 12 Zhuang is one of the mother platform which was used by Miu Shun to create Siu Lin Tau although Miu Shun doesnt mention his art.

In Emei 12 Zhuang or Emei's 12 path in cultivation, there is a set call Siu Tze Zhuang or the Small letter path.

This small letter path is to cultivate Details and fast issue Jin.

the first half of this set is shown in the clip above where Russell demostrated Russell has got this set verify by the gate keeper of the emei 12 zhuang.

With the signature of this small letter path set ----- the similarity of movement as in WCK sup yee sau part of SLT ....., the details handling ( such as in WCK needed to be every detail point to be clear and clean or dim dim cheng) , the fast jin or chuck Keng or short jin. It is extremely likely, the name Siu lin tau is in fact the derivation from the name Siu Tze Zhuang as both focus on the details and have similar type of movements.

So, the creation of WCK is likely to be

Miu Shun created Siu Lien Tau (an art , not a set but might include the long form set)
the art got taught by Yim WC to the red boat (according to Yik Kam)
Siu lien Tau evolve in the Red Boat where southern TCMA were add in such as the pole...etc and become Wing Chun Kuen

Wing Chun split out where WWB/LJ and others of the first generation student of Yim WC continous of evolving the art. However, the core such as the White crane and Emei snake components are still in tag as in the Koo Lo or YKS case.

So, rationally, from the similarity across different older WCK lineages: the moments (move, function, and purpose) , the Jin type, the kuen kuit such as recorded in the Yik Kam SLT kuit, the naming there are too many details which are pointing at Emei 12 Zhuang as one of the mother art of WCK's core. it cant be accidental because the chances of accidental of similarity in many different ares is extremely not likely. Such as a person has the same last name, living in the same area of location, driving the same type of car, working in the same company. what is the chance of that is not a person from the same family?

Thus, IMHO, no matter what is the story or the his-story, one cant avoid the white crane and Emei snake connection. and the Emei snake theory path goes as far as be able to explain why the name Siu Lin Tau is called Siu Lin Tau and where is it likely to be from. Thus, the Emei path cannot be an accident or later add in.

Now if one look at Weng Chun Kuen, Weng Chun or eternal spring which exist in the Red Boat in the same time with Wing Chun but it doesnt have the Siu Lin Tau core and other above characteristics similar to Wing Chun Kuen.

take a look an observe the Sup Yat Sau and other set such as Peng Kuen...etc, those are more closer to CLF and Hung gar on the handling and technics. So this is a different type of art compare with the Siu Lin Tau Core Wing Chun kuen.

Certainly, Weng Chun might evolve with the component of WCK but still the core is not Siu Lin tau type as in their set.

Thus, if one wants to know how the Original WCK looks like in 1850, that got to be more closer to Koo Loo and YKS, not even general Cho family or Yik Kam art today, that is the reality.

The now a days, so called Shao Lin Wing Chun Kuen, IMHO, from the above comparison is an evolution not an original, that is because it has distance itself from the Original WCK, Take a look at TWC, HFY, some Cho family WCK, or even the new HKM WCK.

It has evolved away from the Sup Jee Sau type of "soft" core elements and narrower stances-- those "trade mark" of WCK, and become either more Southern TCMA or White Crane or Ngo Cho based.

BTW. I disagree with VTM decades ago on their WCK report; because IMHO VTM is taken a path of Romancing the Tien Tee Hui and Shao Lin myth ;instead of investigating the signature of the WCK. Now it is a good thing that they accepted the White Crane from the Fujian as a root of WCK.

VTM should have notice and track down where the center line principle of WCK from and get to white crane in no time instead of spending 10 years,

Also, VTM should have investigate the Sup Jee Sau or Koo Loo emei snake signature of WCK and arrive at Emei or other TCMA if they exist; instead of promoting HKB which doesnt have the 1850 WCK signature ;but 1880 Ngo Cho signature beside the White Crane signature.

my prediction is VTM cant get away from Emei 12 zhuang investigation direction because one cant explain why Koo Loo and YKS the older generation which preserve 1850 WCK has those elements.

Sure, saying the above will never win popularity contest and very likely to rise attack from many toward me, however, Facts are Facts. I choose to be honestly report the evaluation instead of let the future generation or the expert in other TCMA to called WCner "Blind" and lying.

For WCner, IMHO, it is better to face all the facts one time and settle it all, other wise when one create one lie to cover another lie there is no end to the struggling ;and finally disregard of how many lie one created one still has to face the fact; because one knows in one's heart what the truth is even one can deny it for different reason in the surface. I said the above not standing in the Yik Kam WCK or any other lineage's position but a general WCner as everyone else equal position.

just some thoughts.

Eric_H

01-03-2011, 10:38 AM

Eric_H

01-03-2011, 10:45 AM

Doesn't Shaolin historically also do a version of crane and snake?

There's legend about it in many different kung fu systems, not just WCK. Heck Ng Mui appears in various lineages too - not just WCK. That's why using her to try to prove snake and crane anything is pretty suspect.

----I'll echo an argument used earlier in this thread....all of these things are found pretty commonly in Southern Chinese Martial Arts. Maybe the Dummy takes a different form from WCK's dummy, but other southern arts use some form of a dummy as well. So if the naysayers would discount very similar techniques and structure between Yong Shun White Crane and WCK as evidence because these similarities are supposedly in all southern arts, the same would have to be said for your evidence above.

Actually, they appear in southern shaolin descended arts specifically. Not just all southern arts.

---Hendrik has already pointed out o-mei elements in Ku Lo WCK....did you miss that? And if I recall, that same feature is part of Yuen Kay Shan WCK.

You have obviously missed where Terrence discussed how it's likely just from being functional body structure that they do things similarly. And I agree with him - which you also seem to have missed.

As far as I know neither YKS or any of the Gu Lo versions use o-mei exercises or specific snake and crane methodology. Only Yik Kam who admittedly studied omei + crane outside of his WCK.

KPM

01-03-2011, 11:27 AM

Keith,

That's the whole point.

Jun Fan Gung Fu != Wing Chun
Yik Kam Slt != Wing Chun

Both arts were influenced by WC, but in the end they are what they are, Jung Fan (later JKD) or Yik Kam SLT.

No, that's not the point. What I was showing is that if Bruce Lee can do what everyone acknowledges as a modified version of Wing Chun (but STILL Wing Chun) and yet call it something different.....why couldn't Yik Kam have done a modified version of Wing Chun (but STILL Wing Chun) and call it something different as well?
Jun Fan Gung Fu is widely acknowledged as a version of WCK, even though it wasn't called "Wing Chun" by Bruce Lee. And Jun Fan Gung Fu is NOT Jeet Kune Do!

Hendrik

01-03-2011, 11:29 AM

You have obviously missed where Terrence discussed how it's likely just from being functional body structure that they do things similarly. And I agree with him - which you also seem to have missed.

As far as I know neither YKS or any of the Gu Lo versions use o-mei exercises or specific snake and crane methodology. Only Yik Kam who admittedly studied omei + crane outside of his WCK.

Sure,
it is just from being functional body structure, every one make a fist via wrapping starting with their pinky in sequence, the whole word is doing it that way, you believe that? hahaha

BTW, Yik Kam doesnt ever mention he studied Emei, so you got that from day dreaming?

what you are facing is not Yik Kam but the older WCK lineages have those Emei signatures even if Yik Kam doesnt exist. and WCK still has explain where are those practices are from?

On the other hand, since VTM called it a Hung Gan Biu WCK created by Hung Gan Biu, if you cant prove Hung Gan Biu exist and trace able, Hung Gan Biu WCK doesnt have the signature of WCK which is preserved in YKS and Koo LOO, then is Hung Gan Biu WCK legitimate WCK? Who create it?

KPM

01-03-2011, 11:35 AM

There's legend about it in many different kung fu systems, not just WCK. Heck Ng Mui appears in various lineages too - not just WCK. That's why using her to try to prove snake and crane anything is pretty suspect.

---I didn't use her to try and prove anything. You outlined the Shaolin origin theory and noted her as a key character. I only proposed that she represented some kind of Shaolin connection in the origination myth. That doesn't even require her to be a real person. She could simply be the metaphor for some kind of connection to Shaolin.

Actually, they appear in southern shaolin descended arts specifically. Not just all southern arts.

---And again....."Shaolin descended" is often a mythological story and hard to prove. I'll bet its not as "specific" as you think!

You have obviously missed where Terrence discussed how it's likely just from being functional body structure that they do things similarly. And I agree with him - which you also seem to have missed.

---No, I didn't miss that. I'm simply pointing out that you stated that these elements were ONLY found in Yik Kam WCK, while Hendrik has pointed out that they exist in other versions of WCK. That has nothing to do with the idea that they may have developed independently, only that they ARE there!

Only Yik Kam who admittedly studied omei + crane outside of his WCK.

---Good grief Eric! Do I need to say this a THIRD time!!!! :eek:

"Wow! You guys seem really dense! How many times does one have to state something in a single thread before it seeks in? Hendrik never said that Yik Kam WCK was the original ancestoral WCK! Yik Kam didn't learn o-mei, crane, or snake. He learned WCK! The theory is that the WCK he learned had been heavily influenced by, if not derived from, those other arts. Those elements were then assembled, combined, and used in a new way to become WCK. WCK did not spring forth from a vacuum! Its developers were all experienced martial artists. Who those original developers were is not clear. The theory is simply looking at what the likely foundational methods may have been."

--No one has "admitted" that Yik Kam studied omei and crane outside of his WCK. You guys have all assumed that in your attacks on Hendrik!

Hendrik

01-03-2011, 11:38 AM

No, that's not the point. What I was showing is that if Bruce Lee can do what everyone acknowledges as a modified version of Wing Chun (but STILL Wing Chun) and yet call it something different.....why couldn't Yik Kam have done a modified version of Wing Chun (but STILL Wing Chun) and call it something different as well?
Jun Fan Gung Fu is widely acknowledged as a version of WCK, even though it wasn't called "Wing Chun" by Bruce Lee.

Bruce Lee and Yik Kam both existed in WCK and are legitimate WCner, one is the student of GM Ip Man, one is the school brother of WWB.

How about Hung Gan Biu ? Who is Hung Gan Biu? Why is Hung Gan Biu WCK doesnt have the older WCK signature such as in YKS and Koo Lo ? is Hung Gan Biu WCK is WCK? at least HKB WCK has the White Crane part ;but no white crane for the HGB WCK.
Could Some one enlightent us on what is the posibilies?

Those are the questions but some choose to ignore it. IMHO.

Hendrik

01-03-2011, 11:49 AM

Since Sergio is in China doing reseach on WCK, I suggest he might want to do one about Sup Jee Sau type of movements, which lineage has it and which doesnt.

also how many lineage making fist via wrapping the fingers starting with the pinky in sequence. What is the reason behind the wrapping.

Those are great signatures to explore into and some thing might comes up. That will be very interesting.

Round two for WCK reserach ----- Go down to the details of handling fingers joints level.

t_niehoff

01-03-2011, 11:52 AM

There's legend about it in many different kung fu systems, not just WCK. Heck Ng Mui appears in various lineages too - not just WCK. That's why using her to try to prove snake and crane anything is pretty suspect.

---I didn't use her to try and prove anything. You outlined the Shaolin origin theory and noted her as a key character. I only proposed that she represented some kind of Shaolin connection in the origination myth. That doesn't even require her to be a real person. She could simply be the metaphor for some kind of connection to Shaolin.

Exactly.

IME a lot of Chinese "history" -- and even stories from the various lineages -- was never meant to be taken literally (as a fact), including the whole Shaolin-story. For example, I was watching a program on Buddhism recently and a Buddhist scholar was asked about whether "the Buddha" really existed. His reply was that it didn't matter, that what mattered was the teachings.

We should never assume some "history" is true until it is proved. But often the facts themselves aren't important.

Actually, they appear in southern shaolin descended arts specifically. Not just all southern arts.

---And again....."Shaolin descended" is often a mythological story and hard to prove. I'll bet its not as "specific" as you think!

So, what we have is a southern fist legend that links to a southern Shaolin temple. Sort of like rooting for the home team? ;)

You have obviously missed where Terrence discussed how it's likely just from being functional body structure that they do things similarly. And I agree with him - which you also seem to have missed.

---No, I didn't miss that. I'm simply pointing out that you stated that these elements were ONLY found in Yik Kam WCK, while Hendrik has pointed out that they exist in other versions of WCK. That has nothing to do with the idea that they may have developed independently, only that they ARE there!

If you appreciate that body mechanics are task specific (which they are), then you should expect to find similar/same mechanics whenever you have similar tasks. And so you would expect to find the same/similar mechanics across WCK.

Only Yik Kam who admittedly studied omei + crane outside of his WCK.

---Good grief Eric! Do I need to say this a THIRD time!!!! :eek:

"Wow! You guys seem really dense! How many times does one have to state something in a single thread before it seeks in? Hendrik never said that Yik Kam WCK was the original ancestoral WCK! Yik Kam didn't learn o-mei, crane, or snake. He learned WCK! The theory is that the WCK he learned had been heavily influenced by, if not derived from, those other arts. Those elements were then assembled, combined, and used in a new way to become WCK. WCK did not spring forth from a vacuum! Its developers were all experienced martial artists. Who those original developers were is not clear. The theory is simply looking at what the likely foundational methods may have been."

Clear enough.

--No one has "admitted" that Yik Kam studied omei and crane outside of his WCK. You guys have all assumed that in your attacks on Hendrik!

To be fair, Hendrik has not always been clear. ;)

Hendrik

01-03-2011, 12:19 PM

To be fair, Hendrik has not always been clear. ;)

That is fair, no objection.

Eric_H

01-03-2011, 12:31 PM

"Wow! You guys seem really dense! How many times does one have to state something in a single thread before it seeks in? Hendrik never said that Yik Kam WCK was the original ancestoral WCK! Yik Kam didn't learn o-mei, crane, or snake. He learned WCK! The theory is that the WCK he learned had been heavily influenced by, if not derived from, those other arts. Those elements were then assembled, combined, and used in a new way to become WCK. WCK did not spring forth from a vacuum! Its developers were all experienced martial artists. Who those original developers were is not clear. The theory is simply looking at what the likely foundational methods may have been."

Actually using Occam's razor (your favorite ;) ) if Hendrik's WCK has o-mei exercises in it, and there was wing chun that existed at the same time that does not have o-mei exercises in it- they had to come from an outside source. And since the "gatekeeper" (wtf is that anyways? Is there a keymaster too?) of omei 12 zhuang (again, whatever that is) has verified Henrdik's exercises as being from o-mei it stands to reason they came in from an outside source.

Those are the questions but some choose to ignore it. IMHO.

Actually, Hendrik there have been people who were asking you questions for years and you haven't answered them. You get what you give.

FWIW - There are articles pending publication which go deeper into Hung Gun Biu's history, it'll be on news stands at some point for people who want to know more about him. However as you can't even seem to answer basic questions, over years worth of time - I'm not going to save you the $5 for the magazine. Simply put, my interactions with you haven't accumulated even close to that much value. Go buy it when it comes out if you wanna learn or wait for it to show up on the internet.

also how many lineage making fist via wrapping the fingers starting with the pinky in sequence. What is the reason behind the wrapping.

You're trying to prove a lineage by how you move your pinky? Please. Next you'll be telling me WCK comes from Taiji because you do your SLT slowly.

That Horse still ain't movin.

Hendrik

01-03-2011, 12:52 PM

Deep in your heart you know you could keep argue, but it goes no where right?
You cant win this one. you know it.

Instead other WCners will get more and more expose and deeper in understand why they are doing what they are doing.... as in the VTM case.

why do you think VTM follow the White Crane of Fujain path if there is no Truth in it?

Also, I am here for WCK discussion and not interested of buying Hung Gan Biu products such as an article of magazine. or some one's HIS-story which cannot be tracked.

Actually using Occam's razor (your favorite ;) ) if Hendrik's WCK has o-mei exercises in it, and there was wing chun that existed at the same time that does not have o-mei exercises in it- they had to come from an outside source. And since the "gatekeeper" (wtf is that anyways? Is there a keymaster too?) of omei 12 zhuang (again, whatever that is) has verified Henrdik's exercises as being from o-mei it stands to reason they came in from an outside source.

Actually, Hendrik there have been people who were asking you questions for years and you haven't answered them. You get what you give.

FWIW - There are articles pending publication which go deeper into Hung Gun Biu's history,

it'll be on news stands at some point for people who want to know more about him.

However as you can't even seem to answer basic questions, over years worth of time - I'm not going to save you the $5 for the magazine.

Simply put, my interactions with you haven't accumulated even close to that much value. Go buy it when it comes out if you wanna learn or wait for it to show up on the internet.

You're trying to prove a lineage by how you move your pinky? Please. Next you'll be telling me WCK comes from Taiji because you do your SLT slowly.

That Horse still ain't movin.

t_niehoff

01-03-2011, 01:06 PM

why do you think VTM follow the White Crane of Fujain path if there is no Truth in it?

Oh, Lord! The VTM isn't interested in truth. The VTM is Benny Meng, and Benny is just interested in making money.

Hendrik

01-03-2011, 01:14 PM

Oh, Lord! The VTM isn't interested in truth. The VTM is Benny Meng, and Benny is just interested in making money.

As any human these days, money making is a norm. however, finding the Truth is not an exclusive act. EVeryone would like the truth if it is possible.

The act of Sergio does shows he has strong interest in Truth. That no one can deny looking at Sergio's youtube. We need to give credit to those who has done a good job.

t_niehoff

01-03-2011, 01:19 PM

As any human these days, money making is a norm. however, finding the Truth is not an exclusive act. EVeryone would like the truth if it is possible.

Oh, Hendrik, that is really naive. Everyone doesn't care about the truth. Some people could care less about the truth. Benny is concerned with making money. That's it.

tigershorty

01-03-2011, 01:54 PM

i agree with terrence. sergio and meng are only interested in promoting themselves and getting tax-deductible travels. how many sifus do each of them have between them? like 15?

no, i'm sorry. if you think the VTM, sergio are interested in anything other than themselves, you have been deceived. theyre cheesy. Benny Meng just keeps posting videos stealing material as if he's the one who discovered it. Sergio just keeps doing interviews to reinforce whatever b.s. he's trying to sell that day. wake up. water seeks its own level.

i wouldn't even care to post this, cause i don't like being negative, but in case anyone new is interested in giving either of those two a dime, save your money and time.

being on youtube and posting 5 minute interviews of other people does NOT make you an expert. it makes you a social media aware marketer.

using legends/assumed history to promote yourself as a fighter/trainer/martial artist is a GIMMICK. it should be dated and done away with by now. use your ability to make students better your marketing angle. not having some "special sauce truth". it's cool if that stuff interests you, but don't pretend to be a historian or a fighter because of it.

KPM

01-03-2011, 02:15 PM

Actually using Occam's razor (your favorite ;) ) if Hendrik's WCK has o-mei exercises in it, and there was wing chun that existed at the same time that does not have o-mei exercises in it- they had to come from an outside source.

---Your logic is flawed. How do you know that the WCK that existed at the same time as Yik Kam's didn't have o-mei elements in it?

And since the "gatekeeper" (wtf is that anyways? Is there a keymaster too?) of omei 12 zhuang (again, whatever that is) has verified Henrdik's exercises as being from o-mei it stands to reason they came in from an outside source.

---Again....have you been paying attention? Sure they came from an outside source! But at what point in time! That "outside source" may very well have been at WCK's inception, not at Yik Kam's time. Once again.....we have a WCK origination myth naming crane and snake as possible elements of WCK's foundation. If the "snake" was an early version of Omei.....then there you have these "exercises" from an outside source. But not necessarily added by Yik Kam. Maybe he did add them himself! But you are not using good logic here.

FWIW - There are articles pending publication which go deeper into Hung Gun Biu's history, it'll be on news stands at some point for people who want to know more about him. However as you can't even seem to answer basic questions, over years worth of time - I'm not going to save you the $5 for the magazine. Simply put, my interactions with you haven't accumulated even close to that much value. Go buy it when it comes out if you wanna learn or wait for it to show up on the internet.

---What about the rest of us? Hendrik isn't the only one participating on this thread. If you know of good historical evidence about the "Hung Gun Biu" theory, then let's hear it!

That Horse still ain't movin.

---Neither is yours! Let's hear that evidence!

tigershorty

01-03-2011, 02:17 PM

at least eric's .com works in his signature. just saying.

KPM

01-03-2011, 02:28 PM

at least eric's .com works in his signature. just saying.

You're right! That website has been gone for awhile now and I've been meaning to delete it from my signature. Its done now! :)

Eric_H

01-03-2011, 04:25 PM

Round we go the mulberry bush...

---Your logic is flawed. How do you know that the WCK that existed at the same time as Yik Kam's didn't have o-mei elements in it?

Because WCK still exists in the same format (SNT/CK/BJ) from a Wing Chun senior (Wong Wa Bo) who practiced at the same time as Yik Kam and it doesn't have Omei elements.

There are separate arguments that keep getting mumbo jumbo'ed together.

-Was WCK from Shaolin - I listed that current generation experts say yes and similarities in all Shaolin based arts that WCK shares. Hendrik says no it is not.

- Did Snake and crane systems have anything to do w/ the formation of WCK - Unknown to everyone, I don't think so because we have no examples of the pre-1800's white crane art that you and Hendrik have referenced. Possible, but unlikely. There seems to be a confusion between snake + omei snake specifically. There were a large number of snake boxing systems.

- Did Yik Kam complete his WC training - based on the addition of outside elements not natively seen in training approach (regardless of similar body mechanics in other systems) I think not, you and Hendrik disagree.

-Did the outside elements exist in WCK natively as part of it's formation? See above.

KPM

01-03-2011, 04:36 PM

Round we go the mulberry bush...

---Yes, because you seem to be purposefully not being logical in your arguments.

Because WCK still exists in the same format (SNT/CK/BJ) from a Wing Chun senior (Wong Wa Bo) who practiced at the same time as Yik Kam and it doesn't have Omei elements.

---Again....how do YOU know exactly what Wong Wa Bo's WCK was like? How do YOU know that it didn't contain some Omei elements?

There are separate arguments that keep getting mumbo jumbo'ed together.

---No they aren't. You are the one that keep saying these things to discredit the snake/crane origins theory.

-Was WCK from Shaolin - I listed that current generation experts say yes and similarities in all Shaolin based arts that WCK shares. Hendrik says no it is not.

---What similarities in "ALL Shaolin based arts that WCK shares"? WCK looks far more like Yong Chun White Crane than it does Hung Ga, Choy Li Fut, Five Animals, etc.

- Did Snake and crane systems have anything to do w/ the formation of WCK - Unknown to everyone, I don't think so because we have no examples of the pre-1800's white crane art that you and Hendrik have referenced.

---What are your examples of pre-1800's Shaolin arts that WCK resembles?

Possible, but unlikely. There seems to be a confusion between snake + omei snake specifically. There were a large number of snake boxing systems.

--So?

- Did Yik Kam complete his WC training - based on the addition of outside elements not natively seen in training approach (regardless of similar body mechanics in other systems) I think not, you and Hendrik disagree.

---How can you prove that Yik Kam added these elements to his WCK and that they didn't already exist in the WCK that he learned? Because you haven't come close to doing that yet.

---Where is your evidence and theories about Hung Gun Biu??? Why did you ignore my prior points? The only reason we are going "around the Mulberry Bush" is that you keep repeating assertions that we have already addressed and have not yet come forward with your evidence about Hung Gun Biu.

Vajramusti

01-03-2011, 05:22 PM

The snake/crane fusion wing chun legend was around long before Hendrik came on the scene
and is not dependent on Hendrik alone. Hendrik's thesis is interesting but is not the sine qua non of the snake crane fusion being an ancestor of wing chun. The crane vertical energy and the snake circular energy and their fusion is a fusion that still exists in good wing chun..not always visible in You.Tube videos which show more gross external motions. And Hnedrik's demo via Russell is not the only possible illustration. The snake is there in good biu-jee jing.

Regarding Shaolin... it's common in CMA to mention a link to "Shaolin" for legitimacy. Shaolin as young forrest is an important buddhist symbolism it was there in early Indian Buddhism before the transmission as well together with flower and spring symbolism...the constant flow of energy.. renewal and transformation.

Lots of confusion with literalist interpretations... thus many scoffed at the legend of Boddhidharma crossing the Yangste on a reed-but boats made out of reed were common and in some places they still exist.

But in forums we gotta argue endlessly. Historical assertions often are tentative- you take the most sensible explanation until a better one comes along.

Joy Chaudhuri

Eric_H

01-03-2011, 05:39 PM

Keith,

I'm not trying to ignore any of your points, it just seems like we're talking past each other. :confused:

---Again....how do YOU know exactly what Wong Wa Bo's WCK was like? How do YOU know that it didn't contain some Omei elements?

Let's be straight up here - not a single person *knows* 100% what happened in WCK in the 1800's, that includes, you, me and Hendrik.

Wong Wa Bo's descended Wing Chun, including the Chun Wa Shun and Leung Bik versions don't have O-mei in them. In fairness, Hendrik says that he sees it in Gu Lo WCK, but we have already discussed that.

---What similarities in "ALL Shaolin based arts that WCK shares"? WCK looks far more like Yong Chun White Crane than it does Hung Ga, Choy Li Fut, Five Animals, etc.

I have already listed some general similarities. As for other systems, Depends what parts of them you look at. Lau Gar, Hung Gar, Chi Sim all have pieces that strongly resemble WCK.

---What are your examples of pre-1800's Shaolin arts that WCK resembles?

I have none and neither do you. I don't think anyone has reliably traced WCK past the 1850's. Really, past Leung Jan it gets more and more speculative.

Possible, but unlikely. There seems to be a confusion between snake + omei snake specifically. There were a large number of snake boxing systems.

--So?

So, the snake and crane myth only says that - snake and crane. Not what snake or what crane if they were in fact kung fu systems. And, as the snake and crane are tied to the Ng Mui myth it should also be pointed out that the crane system that Ng Mui was legendarily tied to was lama pai - different than the white crane we discussed previously.

---How can you prove that Yik Kam added these elements to his WCK and that they didn't already exist in the WCK that he learned? Because you haven't come close to doing that yet.

I've come as close as you have to proving it. You cite the legend, I cite that there were other parrallel WCK lineages at the same time which did not use the same terminology or approach. If those things did exist in the same way we'd see the same format in more than just the Yik Kam lineage. How do we know GM Yip Man didn't invent SNT/CK/BJ? Other WC that existed independent of him has it too.

---Where is your evidence and theories about Hung Gun Biu??? Why did you ignore my prior points? The only reason we are going "around the Mulberry Bush" is that you keep repeating assertions that we have already addressed and have not yet come forward with your evidence about Hung Gun Biu.

You and Hendrik are the ones who keep bringing up HGB, not me. I don't think he has anything to do with what Yik Kam knew or if Omei was native to WCK. I've already stated that additional information is coming when it's published and not before. Regardless, it's outside of what we're talking about.

Eric_H

01-03-2011, 05:40 PM

But in forums we gotta argue endlessly. Historical assertions often are tentative- you take the most sensible explanation until a better one comes along.

Quoted for truth.

KPM

01-03-2011, 06:01 PM

Quoted for truth.

Exactly. And I have been doing what Joy suggested. Occams' Razor. Do you agree with the rest of Joy's post as well?

RB93SAAT

01-03-2011, 09:55 PM

RB93SAAT

01-03-2011, 09:58 PM

hendrik, you claim you have knowledge of o-mei 12 jong and you can't even communicate clearly to others! your attitude and manner tends to put off many people. you didn't show your o-mei execises yourself except talking nonsense about o-mei 12 jong in your vids, after 20 years with you, your student still couldn't even do it correctly, that's the reason i asked you these questions. where and who did yik kam learn his o-mei 12 jong from? and did he ever complete his o-mei 12 jong training?

one of my kung fu teachers, he's been practicing o-mei 12 jong for 12 years under o-mei kung fu master ng shun-leung. i asked his opinion about your vids. his reply was almost the same comments along with others. benny meng and some cho ga sifus said "this guy in U.S. doesn't know much, but likes to munbo jumbo." maybe all these people are totally wrong about you. so, i'll give you a second chance to prove youself as an o-mei expert, but your little game with your student was just a game, or attention seeking!

o-mei 12 jong with a series of combination health and strength builders that also concentrate on many soft exercises with the refrain of waving hands. during the sung dynasty this set of 12 jong was invented by a person, 白云 a.k.a "white cloud." 天字 jong (tin gee jong) is the first set... a nice set of the internal workings of the o-mei kung fu system.

hendrik, you can't back up your rediculous claim such as 'wing chun came from o-mei and crane.' most people know this fact, dai dung fung, yim wing chun, wong wah bo and leung yee tai and others all came before yik kam, so, from where and who and how could you replace yik kam story to the real history of wing chun coiming from dai dung fung and william cheung?

.... and hendrik's reply...

hahaha, who cares? I dont.

'wing chun came from o-mei and crane.' it's not a fact, it is your misguided belief.

Hendrik

01-03-2011, 10:38 PM

Another pretender.

The facts are:

1, Russell get his set corrected by GM Fu who is the present gate keeper of the Emei 12 Zhuang personally.

2, Sifu Jim Rosalendo also visited GM Fu get confirmation and wrote an article on the Emei and WCK connection.

http://www.w1ng.com/mystery-of-the-snake-and-crane-emei-connection/

3, The following is the kuit for the Siu Zee Zhuang set Russell is performing.

小庄动静参, practicing Siu Zee Zhuang, one must investigate both the dynamic and static state
气脉表里间, Qi medirians on the surface and deep into the body
外用以降魔, Externally, the Application of this set is for Subdue the demon.
敌伤不觉焉。 it is capable of injure the Enemy with the enemy not aware of.

Is the kuit accord to

o-mei 12 jong with a series of combination health and strength builders that also concentrate on many soft exercises with the refrain of waving hands.

as you said?

hendrik, you claim you have knowledge of o-mei 12 jong and you can't even communicate clearly to others!

your attitude and manner tends to put off many people. you didn't show your o-mei execises yourself except talking nonsense about o-mei 12 jong in your vids, after 20 years with you, your student still couldn't even do it correctly, that's the reason i asked you these questions. where and who did yik kam learn his o-mei 12 jong from? and did he ever complete his o-mei 12 jong training?

one of my kung fu teachers, he's been practicing o-mei 12 jong for 12 years under o-mei kung fu master ng shun-leung. i asked his opinion about your vids. his reply was almost the same comments along with others. benny meng and some cho ga sifus said "this guy in U.S. doesn't know much, but likes to munbo jumbo." maybe all these people are totally wrong about you. so, i'll give you a second chance to prove youself as an o-mei expert, but your little game with your student was just a game, or attention seeking!

o-mei 12 jong with a series of combination health and strength builders that also concentrate on many soft exercises with the refrain of waving hands. during the sung dynasty this set of 12 jong was invented by a person, 白云 a.k.a "white cloud." 天字 jong (tin gee jong) is the first set... a nice set of the internal workings of the o-mei kung fu system.

.... and hendrik's reply...

'wing chun came from o-mei and crane.' it's not a fact, it is your misguided belief.

Eric_H

01-03-2011, 10:56 PM

Exactly. And I have been doing what Joy suggested. Occams' Razor. Do you agree with the rest of Joy's post as well?

In regards to the snake and crane, i do not. Joy is free to his opinion and although he and I have disagreed in the past we do not try to force the other to agree to our viewpoint - that is where this conflict began with Hendrik.

Like I said pages (and pages) ago, if he only chose to speak for his own lineage or showed some humility (stopped instigating) we can all have space for our own respective lineages. As was said before, nobody knows the true history for all WCK branches 100%. All we can do is discuss and support or poke holes in different theories till we get a best guess.

RB93SAAT

01-03-2011, 11:34 PM

Russell get his set corrected by GM Fu who is the present gate keeper of the Emei 12 Zhuang personally.

so, you do agree that your student couldn't perform his o-mei execises correctly. then why didn't you do it yourself? seriouly hendrik, i think you can do a better job than your student, show us what your o-mei 12 jong yourself, not your student, not GM Fu, not jim, just you, what do you say to that?

it's also better to forget benny meng, forget hkb, they have their fantasy to sell to you as well. and they will not and they can't vauch your o-mei wing chun fantasy. since you are a big fan of sergio, let's see you can really find any o-mei and wing chun connection there before wong wah bo wing chun.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KQHhrsVJfiE&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLqiALIyNMk

LoneTiger108

01-04-2011, 07:22 AM

FWIW - There are articles pending publication which go deeper into Hung Gun Biu's history, it'll be on news stands at some point for people who want to know more about him.

Personally, I would find this very interesting, so if you do know anything about Hung Gun Biu's history it would be very welcomed by me.

As you may have read previously, I've heard others relate to him as Hung Hei Goon which would put his training background under Jee Shim and the creator of Hung Gar. This is also where I have stated my 6 point and half pole form originates, but I have had no feedback on my opinion as yet. The pole plays Leurng Yee Tai taught on the Red Boat was probably a very stripped down version of the original form, of which Lee Shing taught in its entirety and so his student taught me.

That IMHO is one connection to Shaolin. Then there's the legendary Ng Mui (Wu Mei). Now I can't explain why this particular story is now connected to Wing Chun, other than the folk tales of her teaching Yim Wing Chun to defeat a local bully. But I have to admit, I agree with whoever posted the idea that the story is there to highlight something of importance. It may not be the best place to find the truth, but a pretty good place to find meaning and purpose.

Hendrik

01-04-2011, 07:36 AM

RB93SAAT

01-06-2011, 12:26 AM

1, Russell did it perfect.

that is a direct legitimate teaching from the Emei 12 Zhuang's present gate keeper. One needs to get a legitimate solid information directly from the source.

Unlike you pretending, making all kind of claims.

BTW.
As the Emei Kuit present in my previous post, it is not an exercise and you are clueless.

2, Beside all twisted logic, , you have shown you are not capable of proper thinking,
So, here on you are in my ignore list.

master fu chong wen already pointed it out yik kum slt came from o-mei, but he never said yik kam slt came from wing chun. hendrik, that's your twisted logic saying wing chun came from o-mei, it's your opinion, nothing to do with master fu and his comments. "wing chun came from o-mei and crane." it's not a fact, it is your misguided belief. wing chun came from o-mei is just a fantasy, when are you going to wake up? dai dung fung, yim wing chun, wong wah bo and many others...these wing chun masters and their wing chun kune all came before yik kum slt, don't you understand that?

yik kum struggling to stay on the right side of the yik kum wck, you might be surpised to learn where yik kum slt carries more o-mei 12 jong exercises than wing chun kung fu. what is yik kum slt? it's 3 styles in one:"incomplete wck + o-mei 12 jong exercises+ crane boxing" can you give us some answers to these questions?....where and who did yik kum learn his o-mei 12 jong exercises from? did yik kum ever complete the whole o-mei 12 jong set? where and who did yik kum learn his crane from? in fukien or somewhere else? there are many styles of crane boxing in fukien? do you know which crane school yik kum learned his crane boxing from? since you always like to tell people that you have more knowledge than us...but you never give any answer to these questions. why?

Thu Jul 15, 2010 from Paperocksissorscrapper
I love your writing but why oh why do you (hendrik)so often spend half your post reminding everyone that you cant understand from reading or forums and most people are just faking and so on..... you must know alot of 'poseurs.
If theres nothing to be gained in this, why write it? Just to make people feel inadiquite ? This is a form of bragging in it self. I should know I brag all the time. So what.
Just once Id like to hear you honestly ask a question that you didn't already know the answer to....just to shake things up

LoneTiger108

01-06-2011, 04:55 AM

Okay. This is getting quite boring now.

Instead of being a pi$$ing match between hendrik and RB93SAAT (whoever you are!) why can't we discuss the history or stories that do not include Omei/Emei/Ermei stuff??!

Here's my final post here, and I do hope some people out there find this info interesting as I definitely will not do myself any favours by mentioning it.

I have mentioned that 'according to rumour' my Grandmasters Pole Form came from a Hung Gar source linked to Hung Hei Goon. Now, this doesn't mean that Leung Yee Tai didn't develop the 6.5 point pole we see today in the Ip Family because I still think he did. But I am speaking of the 'original form' that came from Jee Shim which is much longer and has more detailed content including a '1/2 pole set'. Hence, why I have always referred to my form as a 6 Point and Half Pole form. I also think it's worth mentioning that within modern Hung Gar/Kuen schools I have yet to hear of a 6.5 pole form.

The man responsible for our pole form in Lee Shing family was known as Luk Ah Choy and again there is a decent write up on his life here:

http://www.hungkuen.net/masters-lukahchoy.htm

AGAIN! This is a DEFINITE connection to Shaolin Temple, if you consider that Jee Shim (Gee Sin Sim See) taught Luk Ah Choy for a very long period of time and he was a classmate and martial brother of Hung Hei Goon (Guan) too.

Now, if this can be evidenced as fact, would this help future generations understand 'why' we inherited these pole plays into an already functional and developed system? Fact is, the pole form 'fits' with many common theories of modern WCK, including central and straight line theories, and with the pole comes much of the traditional Shaolin approach to stance/horse training and strength training drills.

Something to think about and research more imho, but what do you think?