The Book that has caused Choy Lee Fut headaches

[hskwarrior]

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/521664_10151336505387732_356335041_n.jpg

[iron_silk]

That is awesome. ha ha ha

Where did you find it?

[hskwarrior]

The same place i found this little publication about the Green Grass Monk

https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn1/16985_10151340174517732_1983088294_n.jpg

[CLFNole]

Funny picture - Monks with swords...thought they were not supposed to use bladed weapons :D :rolleyes:

Good find!

[hskwarrior]

Funny picture - Monks with swords...thought they were not supposed to use bladed weapons

Good find!

remember, they were trying to overthrow the government. i guess swords would be better than sticks. lol

[CLFNole]

remember, they were trying to overthrow the government. i guess swords would be better than sticks. lol

I agree completely I just always find it funny how people think that the monks were so high and mighty. I think some ate meat, drank wine, etc...If your brothers weilding staffs were being killed by blades it would be safe to assume they would be smart enough to pick up blades themselves.

[hskwarrior]

I agree completely I just always find it funny how people think that the monks were so high and mighty. I think some ate meat, drank wine, etc...If your brothers weilding staffs were being killed by blades it would be safe to assume they would be smart enough to pick up blades themselves.

u got that right

[Shaolindynasty]

In the book "shaolin monastery history, religion and chinese martial arts" by meir shahar there is an historical account of a monk killing a lady from behind with an iron staff who was fleeing a battle site. I guess its a bad idea to be a pacifist in a war....:p

[TopCrusader]

hskwarrior,

Pardon my ignorance but why exactly has that book caused CLF headaches? Now I'm curious! :)

[jdhowland]

It's a fictionalized account of the founding of the Hung Sing school and differs from what some Chan family members like to give as their history.

[hskwarrior]

the book has caused all of CLF head aches because a few of our elders claim the history within this book is wrong. however, i highly doubt any of our elders really read that book. I think some have been told what was in it, but to tell the truth no one really knows whats exactly in it either. the book is very hard to find these days. but im trying to get this book so i can see exactly what is causing so much drama.

[hskwarrior]

come to think about it, the only people i remember making a stink about this book really comes from the students of Doc Fai Wong. he was really the person making the biggest stink by writing his book and saying that the first book was where we got our history from. but what DFW was saying was in the book ISN'T the history as we know it.

there is allegedly something in this book that says jeung hung sing saved Chan Heung over some water rights. this is something we never heard of or even mentioned it before.

the biggest problem came when THEY tried to tell us our own history.

[Ben Gash]

come to think about it, the only people i remember making a stink about this book really comes from the students of Doc Fai Wong. he was really the person making the biggest stink by writing his book and saying that the first book was where we got our history from. but what DFW was saying was in the book ISN'T the history as we know it.

there is allegedly something in this book that says jeung hung sing saved Chan Heung over some water rights. this is something we never heard of or even mentioned it before.

the biggest problem came when THEY tried to tell us our own history.

Again Frank? It wasn't that long ago that you were trotting out that story.
Also, Doc Fai Wong is not THEY, he is your senior (by 2 generations) in the Futsan line :rolleyes:

[hskwarrior]

Again Frank? It wasn't that long ago that you were trotting out that story.
Also, Doc Fai Wong is not THEY, he is your senior (by 2 generations) in the Futsan line

i wasn't lying. :rolleyes:

Doc Fai Wong stopped being my Sisook Gung once he left our school. In person i do respect him as such because i was taught right. but the truth is, he is no longer involved with our lineage in any way shape or form. that isn't the sign of someone part of a lineage, family, group or whatever. I eat dinner at certain restaurants. aside from being a patron, it doesn't make me part of that business. So lets be real. Doc Fai Wong learned HSCLF from 63-67. His interaction with our school ended shortly after that. he doesn't promote us. and i know why he first learned gung fu in the first place. It was something he told my sifu directly. that statement was all i needed to know and makes sense to why he left us after his sifu passed.

and i was answering a question. it was YOU who butted into this conversation. so, if you're looking to liven this place up a bit with a confrontation. LETS DO IT.

[hskwarrior]

PS......

Copy and paste the story of me saying Jeung Hung Sing defended Chan Heung frome being beat up over water rights.

Ben, i know you haven't read that book. you are just spouting out what DFW told you. unless you read it, you're just spoutng off. spout away. LOL

[Ben Gash]

Yes, clearly the daydreams of a 13 year old with no martial arts training fueled by Wuxia comics have a huge impact on the course on the adult life of an experienced practitioner. See, it's not some big secret Frank, he tells people and laughs at what a dumb kid he was.
He moved on because his Sifu was dead. He tracked down other senior students to learn from, then he met a teacher who impressed him enough to want to be his student. Where's the grand conspiracy? Again, the death of his Sifu absolves him of any obligation, and he continues to honour his Sifu and teach his material.

[Ben Gash]

PS......

Copy and paste the story of me saying Jeung Hung Sing defended Chan Heung frome being beat up over water rights.

Ben, i know you haven't read that book. you are just spouting out what DFW told you. unless you read it, you're just spoutng off. spout away. LOL

Yes because finding posts you wrote 6+ years ago would be so simple.
What exactly am I spouting off? I've not made any claims as to the content of the book (although I'm assuming this is the story with the ripped off Yang Lu Chan myth that's on one of your websites).

[hskwarrior]

Yes, clearly the daydreams of a 13 year old with no martial arts training fueled by Wuxia comics have a huge impact on the course on the adult life of an experienced practitioner.

what 13 year old? i love how you're totally oblivious to the clearly obvious.


He moved on because his Sifu was dead.

how does someone move on but still claim to be a part of something that is still active? key word: FORMER STUDENT. those people will clearly say "he hasn't been with us since lau bun died over 46 years ago".

No one denies DFW learned some from Lau Bun. he just never stuck around to be part of the family. again, he doesn't represent us at all. no love lost. he's done great things for PBF.

there's nothing wrong with him honoring his sifu. I would expect him to. Nothing wrong with him teaching our stuff. if he retained it, its all good. Just don't tell people he represents HSKSF. The representative for HUNG SING is my sifu-here & fut san.

pss...if i had stopped learning under my sifu and took a new one, i wouldn't be able to claim hung sing either.

[hskwarrior]

Yes because finding posts you wrote 6+ years ago would be so simple.

thats a HUGE cop out right there. i'll stop there because we both know its a cop out.


What exactly am I spouting off? I've not made any claims as to the content of the book (although I'm assuming this is the story with the ripped off Yang Lu Chan myth that's on one of your websites).

you were one of them telling me that we were saying chan heung was defended by jeung yim over water rights. don't deny you were part of that.

you were also part of those claiming the Green Grass Monk was something fabricated by Hung Sing Fut San people. funny part is, after that debate way back DFW falsely made the claim that GGM was Monk Choy Fook. I hope he realizes people in his own organization doesn't even believe that one.

but, it was a pleasant surprise to come across the book on the GGM. lookin forward to getting it translated. it will be nice to add it all of the other things related to the Green Grass Monk that i have.

[hskwarrior]

Yang Lu Chan myth

who is that?:confused::confused::confused:

ok, researched that. uh, yeah. i'm a ranked member of the very tong created by monk ching cho. that's all i have to say. no myth there.

[Ben Gash]

See maybe if you'd stop with the political "othering" and strawman you'd get on better with people. I'm not "one of those people". The entire history prior to Chan Heung is seriously sketchy, I mean Chan Yuen Woo and Li Yau San are supposed to have learned from a fictional character and Choy Fook is supposed to have kicked up a boulder and broken it (like the tiger killing story, clearly something that grew in the telling).
I am more than comfortable with these facts because I accept that southern KF creation stories are like that. When people didn't know they just inserted some mythical figure.
Our problem is (as you've been told before) is that you keep presenting your own conjecture as hard historical fact, and then flog them to prove some political point or satisfy some psychological need because some Xinhui guy was rude about your Kung Fu once. As you've been told before, if you just said "this is the creation story of my line" everyone would be like "OK". It's your need to make politically divisive statements about Chan Heung and this strange need you have to prove that Jeong Yim was great. Thing is, you largely seem to need to prove this to yourself, as everyone else recognises Jeong Yim as a significant Choy Li Fut ancestor and the Futsan line as a major line of Choy Li Fut.

[Ben Gash]

Also, for someone who goes on so much about Chinese traditions I'd expect you to have better grasp of Wu De relationships.

[hskwarrior]

It's your need to make politically divisive statements about Chan Heung and this strange need you have to prove that Jeong Yim was great

RIGHT THERE. see. All we want to do is tell our story. You guys were the ones who complained about our history. Now you are stating you don't believe much of chan heung's history. you're just saying now what we've BEEN saying all along.

all i can say is i'm happy we didn't deny the green grass monk then turn around to contradict ourselves without proper explanation.

We don't try to make jeung hung sing out to be great. his actions and activities made him great. he is also considered to be one of southern china's greatest fighters, this comes from other styles, not us.


Also, for someone who goes on so much about Chinese traditions I'd expect you to have better grasp of Wu De relationships.

wu de won't save your life. all i care about is whether or not you, me, my students can use our gung fu in real life. at the end of the day that is the most important.

ps. i've always stated it was the history according to our lineage...Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon.

[Ben Gash]

all i can say is i'm happy we didn't deny the green grass monk then turn around to contradict ourselves without proper explanation.
It was explained :confused:

[hskwarrior]

It was explained

i know what he CLAIMS he discovered. funny thing is other prominent CLF sifu from the Chan Heung side of things all say Ching Cho isn't mentioned in Chan Heung's archives, they even want to know the real story behind that one. :rolleyes:

did he openly say he made a huge mistake? i never heard of that yet. did he do this? if he hasn't, do you know if he has plans to admit this error?

[CLFNole]

Frank, his point is valid...we should all just believe what we want and leave it at that because there is a lot if shady info on all sides regarding southern Kung fu history. We are all CLF brothers in various ways and arguing over cloudy histories is a bit pointless from all sides involved.

By the way I get what you say about DFW but at the end of the day he is still part of your tree active or not. Not saying you need to agree with him or like him for that matter but we can't simply erase people from our Kung fu families as much as we might want to :D

[hskwarrior]

Frank, his point is valid...we should all just believe what we want and leave it at that because there is a lot if shady info on all sides regarding southern Kung fu history. We are all CLF brothers in various ways and arguing over cloudy histories is a bit pointless from all sides involved.

i'm not arguing. i only wanted to post the book for people to see what it looked like. someone asked a question, i answered it. simple as that. there is no argument anymore. still, i love researching CLF history. stuff just keeps coming to the surface and its awesome.

regardless of what a small handful on this forum wants to believe, the rest of the CLF world is opening its eyes and seeing more clearly as of late. its all i could have asked for. yet, the history of our lineages isn't over. i even have people from the actual king mui line coming to me to hear our side of the story.

finally, monk ching cho is STILL being connected to Chan Heung and is found all over the internet as of late. He isn't Choy Fook and will never be. but that error keeps getting repeated even in chinese over and over.

[hskwarrior]

By the way I get what you say about DFW but at the end of the day he is still part of your tree active or not. Not saying you need to agree with him or like him for that matter but we can't simply erase people from our Kung fu families as much as we might want to

yeah we dont deny him at all. its one thing if we said he never trained with lau bun, thats not what we're saying. but does he represent us? no. we know who he truly represents.

[Ben Gash]

i know what he CLAIMS he discovered. funny thing is other prominent CLF sifu from the Chan Heung side of things all say Ching Cho isn't mentioned in Chan Heung's archives, they even want to know the real story behind that one. :rolleyes:

did he openly say he made a huge mistake? i never heard of that yet. did he do this? if he hasn't, do you know if he has plans to admit this error?

He wrote a magazine article where he said he'd been mistaken. He didn't change his story on the sly. He has Chan Sun Chiu's Kuen Po collection, which is one of the more complete sets, which gives him information the others may not have.

[hskwarrior]

He wrote a magazine article where he said he'd been mistaken.

really? thats good! where is that? i'd like to read it. then i can go on saying that he made a mistake and all is good. but that doesn't change the fact that his mistake has put a crimp in CLF history now.

[CLFNole]

Truthfully I don't really know what I believe anymore as each side is like Swiss cheese with holes in their stories. At the end of the day I am just happy to have found CLF...the history well it's just that history.

Regarding that book isn't it more or less an early China version of a DC or Marvel comic book? Hell Ching Cho could be the Batman of China for all we know. All kidding aside though out history we see stories and legend that come from real people such as Robin Hood, General Kwan, etc...so I think there is a bit of both truth and fiction within everyone's history.

[hskwarrior]

Regarding that book isn't it more or less an early China version of a DC or Marvel comic book? Hell Ching Cho could be the Batman of China for all we know. All kidding aside though out history we see stories and legend that come from real people such as Robin Hood, General Kwan, etc...so I think there is a bit of both truth and fiction within everyone's history.

those books aren't a bible. they could be a keyhole into learning even the most minor thing about Ching Cho.

Even more important to me is the fact that Monk Ching Cho is the founder of the Tong i represent. There are tongs out there that exist who have their own connections to the other 4 ancestors as well. So, when it comes to the Green Grass Monk and who he was, i didn't find that within CLF history. in fact, very little within the whole sphere of gung fu is known about Monk Ching Cho. outside of CLF, i have a treasure trove of stuff on him. again, CLF no longer has my focus when it comes to researching the green grass monk.

but yes, the book on the green grass monk could very well be a cartoon book or something. nevertheless, it wouldn't hurt to know whats inside it.

[Ben Gash]

really? thats good! where is that? i'd like to read it. then i can go on saying that he made a mistake and all is good. but that doesn't change the fact that his mistake has put a crimp in CLF history now.

It was in IKF, surely you read it because you pretty much immediately responded to it? :confused: Otherwise where did you hear about it?:confused:

[CLFNole]

Doesn't the fact you found info on him outside of CLF bother you just a bit? It does leave openings for people to attack...maybe to the fact he was a real person or more if he was truly part of CLF. With all the fake names people had back then because of the political climate there is really no way to prove anything for sure.

[hskwarrior]

Doesn't the fact you found info on him outside of CLF bother you just a bit?

not in the least. because when you know who he was, why the gov wanted him dead, and so forth it all makes sense why there's nothing on him within gung fu period. who he was, what he was a part of and his MISSION is even more important than him just teaching jeung hung sing gung fu.


It does leave openings for people to attack...

That's not something i worry about. if those who attack without proper ammo then their attacks are null and void. just random arguments.


maybe to the fact he was a real person or more if he was truly part of CLF.

he had NOTHING to do with Choy Lee Fut history. He has a LOT to do with Hung Sing Choy Lee Fut however. our name, our essence, our original purpose all goes back to monk ching cho.


With all the fake names people had back then because of the political climate there is really no way to prove anything for sure.

you're right. but if i just accepted that, i'd never have found what i have.

[hskwarrior]

Gung fu is just a spoke in the wheel of life. you must ask yourself, aside from gung fu who was Chan Heung? Jeung Hung Sing? Monk Ching Cho? Gung fu is what they did, but who were they? when not doing gung fu, what did they do in real life? just because the answer isn't found in gung fu, it can be found in the who, what, where, why and how.

for example. most people in gung fu only know the GUNG FU side of frank. is that all i am? a guy who does gung fu? why limit me to just gung fu? see, i've been a DJ, Rapper, gangster,lover, fighter, survivor, writer, poet, etc, etc. Gung fu is just a spoke in the wheel of Frank.

[hskwarrior]

It was in IKF, surely you read it because you pretty much immediately responded to it? Otherwise where did you hear about it?

i mean when did he write an article stating he made a mistake. its in this IKF? what issue? I know he falsely claimed he discovered monk ching cho was choy fook. but he doesnt know anything about monk ching cho and erroneously assigned his name to a person who wasn't even in the same area.

[Ben Gash]

I know he falsely claimed he discovered monk ching cho was choy fook.
I should point out Frank that this is a libelous statement.

[hskwarrior]

I should point out Frank that this is a libelous statement.

yeah, and if we went to court i sure hope it won't turn into a Sin The situation where the real truth comes out. LOL

i'd love to hear his explanations to the court on why he wrote a book completely denying monk ching cho then turned around and changed his story. then according to ben gash he wrote an article stating he mistakenly thought ching cho was choy fook.

[CLFNole]

It is hard to back track from such a bold statement.

[Ben Gash]

yeah, and if we went to court i sure hope it won't turn into a Sin The situation where the real truth comes out. LOL

i'd love to hear his explanations to the court on why he wrote a book completely denying monk ching cho then turned around and changed his story. then according to ben gash he wrote an article stating he mistakenly thought ching cho was choy fook.

You've changed the frame of the conversation,he never wrote such an article he wrote an article that he'd historically been mistaken about the non existence of Ching Cho, but that he'd recently found in the Kuen Po's mention of Ching Cho. How would this look bad in court? Retractions are normal part of historical work.
Yet again you're making some big thing about the simplest of points.

[hskwarrior]

You've changed the frame of the conversation,he never wrote such an article he wrote an article that he'd historically been mistaken about the non existence of Ching Cho,

i'm repeating what you said. i said he made the false claim of choy fook being ching cho. you said he wrote an article and said he was mistaken. all that came from you.

Ching Cho was NEVER near Mt. Lau Fu or whatever name of that mountain was. i will let you know however, there is a push happening right now where certain masters are now questioning the existence of Choy Fook. i'm not part of that as i have no interest in it.

[Ben Gash]

This is what you said Frank

i know what he CLAIMS he discovered. funny thing is other prominent CLF sifu from the Chan Heung side of things all say Ching Cho isn't mentioned in Chan Heung's archives, they even want to know the real story behind that one.

did he openly say he made a huge mistake? i never heard of that yet. did he do this? if he hasn't, do you know if he has plans to admit this error?
He admitted to making a mistake with the DENIAL of Ching Cho. If you wanted to know about another perceived mistake you should have been clearer

[Ben Gash]

there is a push happening right now where certain masters are now questioning the existence of choy fook lololololololololololol

[hskwarrior]

He admitted to making a mistake with the DENIAL of Ching Cho. If you wanted to know about another perceived mistake you should have been clearer

i say its you who should be clearer in your statements. however, i agree with you laughing about the choy fook thing. i agree that was a little out there.

still, monk choy fook is not the green grass monk unless chan heung sent jeung yim to Choy Fook. but we all know it wasn't chan heung that sent jeung yim to fut san. I LOL with the same fervor as yours.

[extrajoseph]

Frank,

History is not made by movies and novels and they only caused you headaches if you cannot tell the difference between facts and fictions. The author 念佛山人- 許凱如 acknowledged he made up these stories (they are the work of "wind and moon", ie shooting the breeze):

「時許方廿許少年，風流倜儻，與林瀋、張洸、區銘信、黃深明等，恆流連於堤東小舫之中，風流韻事至多，故為 文亦多風月之作。」

http://paper.wenweipo.com/2010/05/15/OT1005150016.htm

[hskwarrior]

thats just so wonderful joseph. fakking smashing if i do say so myself.

[extrajoseph]

I enjoy reading these martial arts novels, but I don't treat them as real history, just good story telling; but if you believe that these novels are telling your history, even when the author said he enjoyed "shooting the breeze" (idle chit-chat), so be it.

[hskwarrior]

I enjoy reading these martial arts novels, but I don't treat them as real history, just good story telling; but if you believe that these novels are telling your history, even when the author said he enjoyed "shooting the breeze" (idle chit-chat), so be it.

ok :):):)....

[jdhowland]

=CLFNole;1212035]Truthfully I don't really know what I believe anymore as each side is like Swiss cheese with holes in their stories.

Such as: where was Chan Heung in the four years he was "overseas"? Some want to speculate that he might have been in San Francisco; some will even report it as a fact--with no proof whatsoever.

It could also be a coverup for his activities during the South China wars.




...so I think there is a bit of both truth and fiction within everyone's history.

Don't trust anybodies histories. Let's make our own.

[hskwarrior]

Such as: where was Chan Heung in the four years he was "overseas"? Some want to speculate that he might have been in San Francisco; some will even report it as a fact--with no proof whatsoever.

what years were those? from 1863/64 to 1867 chan heung was in hong kong with Jeung Hung Sing. they fled there after the Tai Ping rebellion

[jdhowland]

what years were those? from 1863/64 to 1867 chan heung was in hong kong with Jeung Hung Sing. they fled there after the Tai Ping rebellion

Yep. That's the period I'm talking about. Some people have interpreted "over the sea" to mean either the U.S. or H.K.

Q: was a Chan family association ever established in Hong Kong?

[extrajoseph]

According to the family history, Chan Heung went to both Gum San (Gold Mountain meaning America) and Nam Yeung (Sothern Ocean meaning Malaysia and Singapore) to teach Kung Fu by the invitation of the local Chinese associations. His point of departure and re-entry was Hong Kong but he did not have a school there. On one of the trips, he met Jeung Ah-Yim there when he was a kid with his father and took him on as a student.

In the past, Chan Heung gave instruction not to use the name Chan Family as it would put the emphasis on his family and not on his three teachers. So the first "Chan Family" assocation in Hong Kong was called "The Association in Memory of Chan Heung" and not the Chan Family Choy Lee Fut like people would call his descendants nowadays.

A proper procol is part of Wu De in the past but nowadys we don't care about these things any more, as long as we can beat the sshiit out of our opponents.

[hskwarrior]

According to the family history,

yeah, but thats not apart of Jeung Hung Sing's lineage history.

I know many CLF people in sinapore who will dispute Chan Heung ever being in Singapore nor any other Choy Lee Fut school prior to to the 1960's. People in sinapore CLF has done their own research and say that part of CH history isn't true.


Yep. That's the period I'm talking about. Some people have interpreted "over the eastern sea" to mean either the U.S. or H.K.

yeah some of the people i know who do their own research has mentioned that to me in the past a few times. But i think some have come to realize that the OVERSEAS was mistaken for HK. Still, in that 3-4 year period, on separate arrival dates both of them fled to HK which was a safe haven for people involved with the revolution. its during this time that jeung yim and chan heung caught up with each other after 25 plus years.

[hskwarrior]

Q: was a Chan family association ever established in Hong Kong?

personally, i don't know who from the chan family would have taught in HK around that time. its possible tho. We know jeung hung sing had a school there, then Lau Bun's teacher Yuen Hai also taught in HK as well. Yuen Hai left HK at the same time Chan Ngau Sing beat up that British Police officer. Yuen Hai was forced to close down his school there and retreat into china.

[jdhowland]

=extrajoseph;1212537]According to the family history, Chan Heung went to both Gum San (Gold Mountain meaning America) and Nam Yeung (Southern Ocean meaning Malaysia and Singapore) to teach Kung Fu by the invitation of the local Chinese associations.

Since Gam San refers more specifically to San Francisco that would be the same story I heard. It should be possible to verify if any passenger/immigration records survived the fires after the great earthquake.


In the past, Chan Heung gave instruction not to use the name Chan Family as it would put the emphasis on his family and not on his three teachers. So the first "Chan Family" assocation in Hong Kong was called "The Association in Memory of Chan Heung" and not the Chan Family Choy Lee Fut like people would call his descendants nowadays.

A proper procol is part of Wu De in the past ...

Understood. My sifu was one of the founding members of that association. Is it still a viable organization? I would like to get in touch with some of the members.

[jdhowland]

personally, i don't know who from the chan family would have taught in HK around that time. its possible tho. We know jeung hung sing had a school there, then Lau Bun's teacher Yuen Hai also taught in HK as well. Yuen Hai left HK at the same time Chan Ngau Sing beat up that British Police officer. Yuen Hai was forced to close down his school there and retreat into china.

That's what I was getting at. I don't think there was a Chan family hall in Hong Kong in the 19th century.

[hskwarrior]

Right. Grand Elder Lun Chee said it was in HK around 1900 that he met Yuen Hai, so that was one witness to yuen hai's school being there.

[extrajoseph]

Meeting another person in a place does not mean he has a school in this place. Hong Kong was and still is a transpotation hub, you'll see a lot of people passng through there.

[hskwarrior]

Meeting another person in a place does not mean he has a school in this place. Hong Kong was and still is a transpotation hub, you'll see a lot of people passng through there.

ok. we agree then. Chan Heung never had an active school in HK. cool.

[jdhowland]

jdhowland;1212575] It should be possible to verify if any passenger/immigration records survived the fires after the great earthquake.

This quote from BENJUDKINS' article in Kung Fu Tea recently posted by RickMatz might have answered my question:

"The great San Francisco earthquake and fire of 1906 resulted in the destruction of most of the state's immigrations records."


(sigh) After reading the above posts on this forum I am more inclined to think that Chan Heung actually was in San Francisco.

Thanks, Frank, for starting this chain of thought.

[hskwarrior]

Thanks, Frank, for starting this chain of thought.

Chinese weren't officilally let into San Francisco until 1848. Still there were some that were here since the early 1830's, like the Ghee Kung Tong. and there is no mention, no rumors, nothing about Chan Heung ever coming to SF. Since i'm inside chinatown, i would have heard this one before and would even tell others about it. no one is stopping to think about what it was like to travel back then. how much it costed and how long it took. don't believe the hype

[jdhowland]

Chinese weren't officilally let into San Francisco until 1848. Still there were some that were here since the early 1830's, like the Ghee Kung Tong. and there is no mention, no rumors, nothing about Chan Heung ever coming to SF. Since i'm inside chinatown, i would have heard this one before and would even tell others about it. no one is stopping to think about what it was like to travel back then. how much it costed and how long it took. don't believe the hype

Well, sure. That has always been my reason for not believing the story. Chan was well connected and somebody would have made note of his being here. I just can't really say that a lack of official record is proof that he wasn't.

You know the other hype about him telling his followers to be good, peaceful buddhists? Read between the lines. Maybe he never made a political move but he was quickly expanding his influence and could have been in a position to do so.

[hskwarrior]

You know the other hype about him telling his followers to be good, peaceful buddhists? Read between the lines. Maybe he never made a political move but he was quickly expanding his influence and could have been in a position to do so.

yeah, i still have questions about his influence. for example, he was allegedly away so much from his home in King Mui, how could he be responsible for expanding the system at home base? i mean the story says he left and came back to be surprised to see how much his CLF has flourished in his absence. IDK i just don't believe all of this. there's something about it that just doesn't seem right.

[Yum Cha]

Frank, those look oddly like the Chinese 'penny novels' that were popular fiction for the masses. The cultural equivalent to the stories of "Billy the Kid". the kind of books that had all the stories of the 5 elders. Or?

[hskwarrior]

Frank, those look oddly like the Chinese 'penny novels' that were popular fiction for the masses. The cultural equivalent to the stories of "Billy the Kid". the kind of books that had all the stories of the 5 elders. Or?

yea, i know this. the first one, i just posted it because while no one has ever saw that before, it was at the base of our heated debates.

what stories of the 5 elders? and which 5 elders are you referring to?

do i consider these as historical evidence? not in the least. as i've stated one million times plus, no one has ever read the first book, so no one knows what the booklet has to say.

in the case of the green grass monk booklet, i posted it to prove he wasn't the Hung Sing concoction. EJ and the others have all tried to claim we made him up. truth is, he already existed and was hated by the QING long before Hung Sing Choy Lee Fut was created in 1851. again, i posted the ching cho stuff to PROVE its not a hung sing fabrication.

[Yum Cha]

....what stories of the 5 elders? and which 5 elders are you referring to?...

Exactly, just stories, and so many different ones, like comic books without the pictures...yet so many people are convinced they are fact. Sure, there may be an element of fact, or an historical character or two, but its supposed to be entertainment.

[hskwarrior]

Exactly, just stories, and so many different ones, like comic books without the pictures...yet so many people are convinced they are fact. Sure, there may be an element of fact, or an historical character or two, but its supposed to be entertainment.

yeah i never read them so i don't know what's in them either. my connection to the monk with the name of Ching Cho is much deeper than any childs book or even gung fu. most people can't get past the fact that he was a monk in addition to other things.

[Drake]

Chinese history is a pain in the ass. Too many stories and fables, and very little fact.

[bawang]

Chinese history is a pain in the ass. Too many stories and fables, and very little fact.

its only pain in the ass when you mistaken a street corner 5 dollar teenage novel for historical records.

triad history comes from street corner fairy tale book. "brotherhoods" like hong men were always gangsters. in the ming dynasty they wanted to overthrow the ming and restore the mongols.

[David Jamieson]

Chinese history is a pain in the ass. Too many stories and fables, and very little fact.

That's not true.

There is a whole lot of really good stuff on Chinese history. My particular interest in the influx of Buddhism into China for instance and there is a lot of good academic material on this. In English!

Timelines aren't hard to figure on even if you don't speak Chinese and you can back up through the major dynasties to the very earliest Chinese the Shang.

It's probably good to note that we are talking about an almost 5000 year timeline of history, with quite a lot of it still extant!

The forbidden city is said to be absolutely loaded with treasures that are not yet opened.

But China and it's history is really fascinating. Stay away from Tales from the Water Margin I guess if you think it's all fables and such.

[Snipsky]

triad history comes from street corner fairy tale book. "brotherhoods" like hong men were always gangsters. in the ming dynasty they wanted to overthrow the ming and restore the mongols.

the Mongols Motorcylce club came from China? :confused::confused::confused:

[Snipsky]

its only pain in the ass when you mistaken a street corner 5 dollar teenage novel for historical records.

triad history comes from street corner fairy tale book.

I highly doubt hsk thinks those booklets are historical records. The bible is a novel like those 5 dollar teenage novel's. yet there's no proof Jesus actually existed either. based on what hsk has said here, he sounds like he has more than anyone here or in choi lei fat.