Snake & Crane Wing Chun

[Paul T England]

Thought some of you might like to see this.

Its a group in Hong Kong with a different line of wing chun from ip man.

I met them a couple of years ago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxVx08OEuYk&feature=player_embedded#!

Paul
www.moifa.co.uk

[kung fu fighter]

here are three other clips of this group
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=Tj5OElGZCgU&feature=endscreen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4AIGCfYSrg&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uM27r53MrNE&feature=related

[Lee Chiang Po]

Really, these videos are not much different from most I see on utube. Mostly lesser skilled students doing forms, and chi sao games where the participants attempt to out chi sao one another. Wing Chun has no snake or crane aspects whatever. Never did and never really will.
I have watched a million or so utube videos of simple forms like Sil Lim and Chum Kil, and even Bil Gee, and for the most part some of the moves are misrepresented through action so to speak, and not actually done properly when done. This video is no different from the rest.

[Hendrik]

Really, these videos are not much different from most I see on utube. Mostly lesser skilled students doing forms, and chi sao games where the participants attempt to out chi sao one another. Wing Chun has no snake or crane aspects whatever. Never did and never really will.
I have watched a million or so utube videos of simple forms like Sil Lim and Chum Kil, and even Bil Gee, and for the most part some of the moves are misrepresented through action so to speak, and not actually done properly when done. This video is no different from the rest.

Lee,

Could you please share you form in YouTube with us?

Thanks and appreciate!

[Lee Chiang Po]

Hello Hendrik. I had agreed earlier to make and post something to Utube, but have not done so as yet. I talked my grand daughter into videoing it for me, but then she broke her little video cam. I have borrowed one, but am learning to operate it. I might be able to just set it up on the tripod and start it up and do a few forms and see how it looks. I find lighting to be a serious problem with most of these amature video's. A black shadow figure with a bright window or light behind them. I will try to accomidate your request.

[Hendrik]

Hello Hendrik. I had agreed earlier to make and post something to Utube, but have not done so as yet. I talked my grand daughter into videoing it for me, but then she broke her little video cam. I have borrowed one, but am learning to operate it. I might be able to just set it up on the tripod and start it up and do a few forms and see how it looks. I find lighting to be a serious problem with most of these amature video's. A black shadow figure with a bright window or light behind them. I will try to accomidate your request.

Lee,

Thanks.

This is an important data point. So it is a meaningful mission.

[Phil Redmond]

. . . Wing Chun has no snake or crane aspects whatever. Never did and never really will. . . .
Ours does. :)

[Phil Redmond]

Thought some of you might like to see this.

Its a group in Hong Kong with a different line of wing chun from ip man.

I met them a couple of years ago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TxVx08OEuYk&feature=player_embedded#!

Paul
www.moifa.co.uk
I didn't watch it all but it looks like Pan Nam WC.

[LoneTiger108]

Wing Chun has no snake or crane aspects whatever. Never did and never really will.

That's quite a classic sweeping statement that get's me thinking that you might think you have the only/true version of Wing Chun or have had a Sifu that debunks any connection to Shaolin whatsoever? Or maybe you just don't like this particular branch or individual? :cool:

Not that I personally have an issue with your opinion, but it would be nice for you to evidence this just has others have tried to evidence the Snake and Cranes connection to our current methods.

Or has Hendrik has also suggested, show us how you do things...

[Lee Chiang Po]

That's quite a classic sweeping statement that get's me thinking that you might think you have the only/true version of Wing Chun or have had a Sifu that debunks any connection to Shaolin whatsoever? Or maybe you just don't like this particular branch or individual? :cool:

Not that I personally have an issue with your opinion, but it would be nice for you to evidence this just has others have tried to evidence the Snake and Cranes connection to our current methods.

Or has Hendrik has also suggested, show us how you do things...

I do not consider mine to be the only true/ or the better wing chun. I come from a lost lineage so to speak, because I have no idea from whom it comes beyond my father. He refered to it as Hung Fa, and spoke of an originator by the name of hung. For what that might be worth. No mention ever of shaolin or any of the more promenent names in the style today. Snake and Crane comes from the other/ older gung fu where animals and serpents were immulated. Wing Chun is a more refined, more scientific version of fighting, which has long since moved away from the animal styles. You can claim to have crane and snake in your wing chun, and you might, but if you do then you are moving away from the more refined aspects of wing chun.
My wing chun is very efficient, very effective, and has proven deadly. It serves the same basic principals that good wing chun follows. The sequence in which the forms follow may vary, as most seem to do, but the same techniques tend to be basic. Well, most of them do anyway.
In making a video I intend to take some time in doing so. Explaining exactly what each move or technique represents and how it is to be used. That way you can more fully understand my point of view.

[shaolinhouse]

this was very interesting thank you for sharing.

[LoneTiger108]

In making a video I intend to take some time in doing so. Explaining exactly what each move or technique represents and how it is to be used. That way you can more fully understand my point of view.

I look forward to seeing that. A very big difference in ways of teaching is evident in what you say here too... my SLT is method based not technique based so it will be an interesting comparison.

It does sound like you have learnt an older blueprint of Wing Chun, especially when you mention Hung Fa, but your mindset seems more modern like Ip Family too. And FWIW nothing is more scientific than the older systems, considering that martial taoism IS ancient alchemic science. ;)

I am also working on some filming that explains more about what we do and the connection of snake/crane methods to all our interactive practises. It is all part of our Yee Jee Kim Yeung Ma method.

[Savi]

Though we don't utilize the animal type body kung fu/mechanics (more so in form of energy), there are references to our Shaolin heritage via the Phoenix Eye, Crane Bong Sao, Eagle Bong Sao, and Dragon Claw. They are demonstrated in sections 2 and 3 in our HFYWCK SNT form.

My kung fu brother Eric posted on this topic over on www.hfy108.com


Crane and Snake and what they mean to HFY Wing Chun

In many kung fu systems such as Hung Gar, Wing Chun, and Taiji there is mention of a duel between a snake and a crane being influential to the foundation of these styles. Some say that the determined and quick strikes to the snake allowed it to devour the crane, and some say the calm nature and deflecting motions of the crane allowed it to prevail. What does this story have to do with us as HFY Wing Chun people?

Myth 1: It must mean that wing chun comes from crane boxing!

First, understand that there are many variations on Crane Boxing, the oldest arguably being Lama Pai, the Tibetan white crane boxing system. Unfortunately, Lama Pai never crossed paths with wing chun, and is significantly different enough to make it an unlikely match.

Next in line are the two white crane boxing systems of fukien province. Many argue that as it traces back to the 1700's fukien white crane is the parent of many southern arts especially wing chun. This discounts Wing Chu's own history – that Tan Sau Ng, the founder of the King Fa Wui Gwoon (Red Boat Opera Troupe) was an active Wing Chun member in the 1700's, around the same time that Fukien white crane was born.

The reasons this seems plausible:
1)White Crane uses high horses like wing chun
2)Yong Chun (the mandarin term for wing chun) was a town famous for its white crane
3)Some motions in a white crane form look like different bits of Wing Chun forms.

These theories don't hold water for the following reasons:
1)Dragon Style was invented hundreds of years prior and it uses upright stances as well. Most southern Chinese martial arts use a high standing horse, and many have nothing to do with the White Crane Boxing system.
2)In the town of Yong Chun there were 4 famous lineages of white crane, however this town did not create the style we know today as “Wing Chun.” It is merely a coincidence of name.
3)This again is only judging by the look – pieces of many southern Chinese martial art systems look similar, we only have three joints in each arm, eventually motions will look similar. Pieces of Weng Chun, Bak Mei and Lung Ying all resemble Wing Chun, but all are very very different to it.

Myth 2: Then, it must come from Snake boxing for sure!

Again, as with Crane boxing, there are a number of snake based styles, shaolin, omei and local village boxing all existed in various times in China. Though the history of snake style is mostly lost, there are legends on snake style going back very far in kung fu, specifically being tied to shaolin boxing. Quick strikes, pressure point manipulation, deft deflections and suffocating bridges all are signatures different snake boxing styles.

So why do people think it's tied to wing chun?
1)Biu Jee, wing chun's third form uses finger strikes to vitals – just like snake!
2)The snake body uses internal energy, the moves look like they take no effort – just like wing chun!

Again these theories are lacking for the following reasons:
1) Many systems use finger strikes, the use of the finger is one of the 6 major functions of the arm, it is nothing special. As the finger is a weaker weapon structurally it can only safely be used against soft targets such as the eyes and throat – this is common sense not a link to snake boxing.
2) Internal relaxed energy is common to all kung fu, specific to snake there is the coiling and uncoiling of the spine – this is not used in Wing Chun. We have a straight vertical spine on which we base our center line theory.

So what does snake and crane mean to Wing Chun?

In many kung fu systems, although they are not derived from crane and snake boxing, they have the attitude of either the crane or the snake. This is seen in Hung Gar, Choy Gar, and almost every other southern system – including Wing Chun.

The Crane Attitude: Deflecting, wing like motions. In Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun, this is most easily seen in the training layer of Cheurn Kiu Saam Jin (Long Bridge 3 expressions). The tool of Ngoi Gwa Sau easily demonstrates the idea of a white crane flapping its wings – larger deflecting wing-like motions to control an opponent. The structure, footwork and leverage are all vastly different to any white crane system, but the attitudes are the same.

The Snake Attitude: Piercing motions, slipping in past the guard, strike and recoil. An example in HFY Wing Chun would be (somewhat ironically) the crane bong sau – hok bong. Used in bridging as a centerline piece, this tool also can slip in past an opponent’s guard and pierce the centerline as a finger strike attack. It does not require any body coiling or adjustment like snake boxing, but it still maintains the same attitude in operation.

The allegories of the snake and crane are part of wing chun for good reason, deflections and piercing nature are hallmarks of our style – regardless of lineage. We do not play force against force and do not ever give up the forward pressure – seeking a way in. This is part of what makes Wing Chun its own unique kung fu style.

Thanks for taking a look at what the snake and crane means to HFY Wing Chun, please ask any questions or add any comment on the discussion forum HFY108.com.

~Eric Heitmuller

[Hendrik]

page five in this presentation has the photocopy of the 1890 writting of snake and crane wing chun.

seeing is believing and an evidence is better then a thousand years of speculation.



http://www.slideshare.net/ccwayne/history-snake-crane-wing-chun-mun

[wingchunIan]

page five in this presentation has the photocopy of the 1890 writting of snake and crane wing chun.

seeing is believing and an evidence is better then a thousand years of speculation.



http://www.slideshare.net/ccwayne/history-snake-crane-wing-chun-mun

Sorry Hendrik, but if you really subscribe to "seeing is believing" then you are going to be easily duped. A blurred photocopy of an unauthenticated document with a claim doesn't constitute proof of anything. IMO the whole slide show lacks any credibility, its a hidden style not taught to anyone, no involvement with other etc but it looks exactly like all other forms of Wing Chun, has most of the same alledged origins and then has pictures of representatives winning awards at competitions.....

[LoneTiger108]

page five in this presentation has the photocopy of the 1890 writting of snake and crane wing chun.

seeing is believing and an evidence is better then a thousand years of speculation.

Hendrik, as much as I appreciate peoples efforts in their research into the origins of Wing Chun, I personally think it's a bit of a stretch that this 'photocopy' of Law Tiu Wens notebook explains anything and everything about Wing Chun. I have many notebooks myself, but that is all they are: my personal account of my learning.

Besides, Wayne Yung is pretty clear that the history about his lineage is very unclear because of all the secrecy and Law Tiu Wen said he only knew that it's roots lay with Chi Sim.

In other words, this is all still speculation from one persons learning during that time period. And as we have seen over more recent years, one persons learning really is only a brief snapshot in comparison to the thousands more who learnt too ;)

[Hendrik]

Hendrik, as much as I appreciate peoples efforts in their research into the origins of Wing Chun, I personally think it's a bit of a stretch that this 'photocopy' of Law Tiu Wens notebook explains anything and everything about Wing Chun. I have many notebooks myself, but that is all they are: my personal account of my learning.

Besides, Wayne Yung is pretty clear that the history about his lineage is very unclear because of all the secrecy and Law Tiu Wen said he only knew that it's roots lay with Chi Sim.

In other words, this is all still speculation from one persons learning during that time period. And as we have seen over more recent years, one persons learning really is only a brief snapshot in comparison to the thousands more who learnt too ;)


I don't know about the rest. But the note book and the content in the note book is a data point of what happen around 1870.

[LoneTiger108]

I don't know about the rest. But the note book and the content in the note book is a data point of what happen around 1870.

Like I said, a personal notebook is a good data point to refer to. Agreed. But it is only ONE point and there are surely more to look into IMHO.

[LoneTiger108]

Like I said, a personal notebook is a good data point to refer to. Agreed. But it is only ONE point and there are surely more to look into IMHO.

Like Leung Jans book(s) as an example :)

[Savi]

Like I said, a personal notebook is a good data point to refer to. Agreed. But it is only ONE point and there are surely more to look into IMHO.I appreciate your comments LoneTiger108. Glad to see like minded people here!

[GlennR]

Like Leung Jans book(s) as an example :)

Good point Spencer.

I mean lets face reality here..... how could you take someone's note book from over 100 years ago as fact when no one can confirm how many son's Leung Jan had??

[LoneTiger108]

Good point Spencer.

I mean lets face reality here..... how could you take someone's note book from over 100 years ago as fact when no one can confirm how many son's Leung Jan had??

Listen, I don't want to say this is either fact nor fiction! I have always been open to exchanging research on subjects surrounding Wing Chun and there must be a certain flexibility in our approach to this. Others believe in Jee Shim over Ng Mui, that Wing Chun herself never existed. It's all speculative. Man, I've even been told of how many children Wing Chun had but I aint holding my Sifu to ransom over it!

The book Wayne Yung has may be 100% genuine. It may contain many fascinating insights into 1850 WCK as practised by Yik Kam, but this is my point. That's one bloke, and as much as his input may be important I couldn't say that it is neccessary for us all to adopt his way because I personally have found very very similar (if not identical) methods within my own learning. And again, my Sigung was only one man too! As for Leung Jans book(s) the only people with the right to comment are those that have read/studied them from cover to cover and that is very few people. Even a diagnosis of a medical condition can have Wing Chun within it, if you know what to look for.

I'm also a writer. I kept notes throughout my 10 years with my Sifu. I write much less now partly because it's all here in this forum and on Facebook or Twitter lol! The modern age eh?! But even my notes really only mean anything to ME. Without ME passing them on and highlighting exactly what they mean they may as well be used as toilet paper.

So it's not only the notebooks we need. We need proper transmission, and at least Hendrik is trying to share his thoughts on that process and I'm thankful for that.

[GlennR]

Listen, I don't want to say this is either fact nor fiction! I have always been open to exchanging research on subjects surrounding Wing Chun and there must be a certain flexibility in our approach to this. Others believe in Jee Shim over Ng Mui, that Wing Chun herself never existed. It's all speculative. Man, I've even been told of how many children Wing Chun had but I aint holding my Sifu to ransom over it!

The book Wayne Yung has may be 100% genuine. It may contain many fascinating insights into 1850 WCK as practised by Yik Kam, but this is my point. That's one bloke, and as much as his input may be important I couldn't say that it is neccessary for us all to adopt his way because I personally have found very very similar (if not identical) methods within my own learning. And again, my Sigung was only one man too! As for Leung Jans book(s) the only people with the right to comment are those that have read/studied them from cover to cover and that is very few people. Even a diagnosis of a medical condition can have Wing Chun within it, if you know what to look for.

I'm also a writer. I kept notes throughout my 10 years with my Sifu. I write much less now partly because it's all here in this forum and on Facebook or Twitter lol! The modern age eh?! But even my notes really only mean anything to ME. Without ME passing them on and highlighting exactly what they mean they may as well be used as toilet paper.

So it's not only the notebooks we need. We need proper transmission, and at least Hendrik is trying to share his thoughts on that process and I'm thankful for that.

Nicely put. Youre spot on about the notes IMO, they are personal and, regardless on who wrote them, its the writers personal opinion/conclusions of what he was doing at the time.
Are they useful? Sure
Make for a possible supplement's to your current training? Perhaps
Are they Gods own authority on the subject without objective testing? Absolutely not.

Im all for looking back at the old guys (im becoming a bigger and bigger Joe Louis fan as i look at/read his take on boxing) but you have to have a balance between what was and what is now. And i dont see that with Hendricks posts (and posts and posts)

[LoneTiger108]

... but you have to have a balance between what was and what is now. And i dont see that with Hendricks posts (and posts and posts)

I understand and agree to a point.

But aren't we all the same when it comes to repeating ourselves here?? :eek:

[GlennR]

I understand and agree to a point.

But aren't we all the same when it comes to repeating ourselves here?? :eek:

To a degree.

But heres a question for you, when have you ever seen Hendrick ask about somebodies approach..... i think never

He has his own agenda and nothing else