Sanshi / San sik

[Minghequan]

Hi all,

A fair bit has been mentioned about Sanshi or San Sik in other threads. I'm not a full-on Wing Chunner bit these various descriptions interest me.

I'd like to know if someone can post the actual Chinese hanzi for this term???

[LFJ]

散式 ........

[KPM]

LFJ could tell you better because I am not a speaker or reader of Chinese. But from what I understand, San Sik means "separate section" or "separate part." Another term that means essentially the same thing is San Dim or "separate point." Its the same "dim" as in Luk Dim Boon Kwan, with "point" implying a specific concept of application.

[LFJ]

It's the same san from sanda which means "loose" striking. The shi character refers to individual "postures" or "techniques". So, literally something like "loose postures" or "loose techniques" trained individually (separate techniques), as opposed to a set or form which would be various such postures strung together.

[KPM]

It's the same san from sanda which means "loose" striking. The shi character refers to individual "postures" or "techniques". So, literally something like "loose postures" or "loose techniques" trained individually (separate techniques), as opposed to a set or form which would be various such postures strung together.

Ah! Thanks LFJ! This explains why someone taking the term very literally would think that "San Sik" is the same thing as "San Sao" which is just unstructured practice of random techniques, rather than what San Sik really are, which are short set forms.

[Paddington]

What a great thread, I've learnt a lot. LFJ, when you say 'trained individually' does that also mean repeatedly as in sets?

[Minghequan]

Thank you all for sharing! I have learned a great deal here!

[KPM]

One of the big/confusing problems with TCMA is all the labels describing essentially the same thing with minute differences, worse than English. .

Ain't that the truth! Then you start switching back and forth between Cantonese and Mandarin, or worse yet..mixing them up, and things can get very confusing! Then you may see an art like Southern Mantis use the same term as found in Wing Chun, but for something different! That's why I stopped to define what I meant by "San Sik" on that other thread. But Hendrik just glossed right over it.

[LFJ]

What a great thread, I've learnt a lot. LFJ, when you say 'trained individually' does that also mean repeatedly as in sets?

Well, I don't do saan-sik like the mainland guys in my lineage. So you'll have to talk to them on specifics what they do and why they do it. I'm just translating the characters.

式 shi/sik refers to individual postures or techniques, these can constitute a whole set or form, 套路 taolu/tou-lou, when strung together. A 套路 is made up of a certain number of 式.

散式 sanshi/saan-sik then means loose (separate, individual) 式. What I've seen of the guys who do 散式 is an individual action like taan-sau or bong-sau done repeatedly, alternating sides. Sometimes this includes shifting or two or three 式 repeated together in a short sequence (there's no conjugation in Chinese, so 式 could refer to one or more. 散 just means they are done separately from a longer set).

Of course, if you string taan and bong together with other 式 you get a form, 套路, and that's what SNT, CK, and BJ are.

[KPM]

Of course, if you string taan and bong together with other 式 you get a form, 套路, and that's what SNT, CK, and BJ are.

Exactly! WCK forms are not about fighting an imaginary opponent like you find in a lot of TCMA forms. That's why I stated in the other thread that the WCK forms are essentially a series of San Sik strung together. Each section of the forms can easily be broken out and practiced individually over and over to really get them down. That way you can really work on the specific body dynamic or technique or concept or "gong" that is inherent in that section. Take for instance the third portion of SNT after the two-handed actions: Pak -- Tan ---Palm Strike, then Tan -- Gan -- Tan (or Tok depending on your lineage), then Bong -- Tan -- Side Palm strike. This is 3 different San Sik strung together. There is no "imaginary fight" that links them together as a logical progression to use against an opponent. There is no mysterious "gong" that jumps from one to the other....after all...you return to a neutral position with the fists at the chest between each one! There is absolutely no reason why any body dynamic or any "gong" that is developed when you do the three in series would be lost when you break them out and practice the three individually. They are strung together in a series as a "form" for ease of memory, practice and teaching. There is nothing "magical" about the sequence of the forms. They are tool for learning and development. This is why I don't understand the reaction my comments received from both Hendrik and Joy on that other thread. This is why the teaching of KLPS is just Wing Chun in another format and NOT just simply "some basic drills."