For those who considered to have received the whole system, can you simply explained , how your sifu have certified the link to the ancestors ?
My answer will come after
Regards
Printable View
For those who considered to have received the whole system, can you simply explained , how your sifu have certified the link to the ancestors ?
My answer will come after
Regards
I'm a White Crane Guy, not Wing Chun. My link is to the founder .... not in all that I do but by the virtue of who I am with and in that she gave rise to the art form I pursue. Having said that I am not teaching the"original" as I simply believe that it no longer exists as the art would have underwent a natural progression over generations of practitioners adding sometimes overtly often subconsciously to the art.
- My teacher's teacher married to his teacher's daughter.
- My teacher married to his teacher's daughter.
- My teacher's daughter only liked girls. The tradition broke right there. :(
Moshe was talking about wing chun- not white crane or shuai chao.
Try not to hi jack the topic.
This is an interesting question. My sense is that there is a good bit of fantasy in most lineages. My instructor had some photos of his instructor who simply learned from his father, from his father, and so on. I don't have a sheep skin listing each person back to shaolin or anything.
Most importantly, I was also impressed by my instructors ability to fight and to teach others to fight. I could see that what was happening at the school was a legitimate fighting art that had been developed over multiple generations. It was the 80's and here it was that a school was drilling out of movement and trained all ranges of fighting (although, the grappling was admittedly weak).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure-hands do the talking,,, but in a net forum there are various kinds of discussion.This thread was about Ng Chan at the beginning-Moshe's sigung. Moshe was asking how peop;e have conceptions about Ip Man's original wing chun.He was going to give his own views later. One can have their own opinions- doesn't hurt to listen first. IMO
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi Glenn-not so odd a question IMO--perhaps phrased in an unfamiliar way.
There are many effective ways to fight-each have their own dynamics and foundations,
It seems to me that Moshe was asking how those who think that they have fully developed understanding of wing chun specially Ip Man wing chun-came to that conclusion. Of course, I could be wrong.It's difficult in a chat forum to discuss conclusively-effective usage
The ball is really on Moshe's court. Chee has done a good job in translating Moshe's sifu's Chinese. There finally is beginning to develop a compendium of views of Ip Man's major students. e got a late start on Ng Chan.
No, i get the question Joy, just not sure what he is trying to achieve. But hey, its a forum so lets chatQuote:
Hi Glenn-not so odd a question IMO--perhaps phrased in an unfamiliar way.
Ok, i guess my question in return would be how does anyone have the authority to confirm who's take on IM WC is complete or not/Quote:
There are many effective ways to fight-each have their own dynamics and foundations,
It seems to me that Moshe was asking how those who think that they have fully developed understanding of wing chun specially Ip Man wing chun-came to that conclusion. Of course, I could be wrong.It's difficult in a chat forum to discuss conclusively-effective usage
I dont think Moshe is doing this to be the "real deal" but hasnt WC gone down this path below?
As Moshe has, what appears to be and interesting lineage of WC, id prefer more discussion and maybe some clips/photos showing the differences he discusses.
But ofcourse thats his choice
Would a website, highlighting the different lineages take on WC be great ;)Quote:
The ball is really on Moshe's court. Chee has done a good job in translating Moshe's sifu's Chinese. There finally is beginning to develop a compendium of views of Ip Man's major students. e got a late start on Ng Chan.
Don't see the Ng Chan reference anywhere here until you brought it up. Guess you are assuming that this thread is specifically about Ng Chan... Maybe, maybe not...
No issue with Moshe's English, just posing an honest question related to the thread's starting post. I have the general sense that in Ving Tsun circles the concern about lineage is bigger than the concern about practical skill. Not calling Moshe into question, but rather the significance of lineage talk...
THE GOAL OF THE FOUNDERS OF THE STYLE WAS ONLY EFFICIENCY
MY QUESTION REFERS ONLY TO THIS GOAL AND WHAT MAKE THE LINK IN PRACTICE
(skill and ability and NOT formal through a book .paper or A OATH)
WITH YIP MAN ,LEUNG CHAN AND SO...
IT CANNOT BE BASED AND OUR OWN EVALUATION AND EXPERIENCE ,WITHOUT KNOWING TO WHAT TO REFER ...
SO FOR THE MASTERS X ,Y OR Z ... WHAT CAN MAKE FULLY LEGITIMATE TO REFER TO THE ANCESTORS ?
Hi-jack the thread??? :confused: No I was not. I was however talking from my own experience and view of the matter of lineage and in one (from any art) making a claim back to the founders/ancestors which IS the topic of this thread. ;)Quote:
Vajramusti wrote:
Moshe was talking about wing chun- not white crane or shuai chao.
Try not to hi jack the topic.
I stated:
I believe this can be applied to the Wing Chun way (or any number of arts) hence my posting. ;)Quote:
I simply believe that it no longer exists as the art would have underwent a natural progression over generations of practitioners adding sometimes overtly often subconsciously to the art.
Vajramusti, a word of advice if I may, try targeting the actual subject matter and not individuals. Slow down, read each post, understand the intent of each post, then offer your thoughts.
It would make the world a much kinder place. :)Quote:
Vajramusti wrote:
One can have their own opinions- doesn't hurt to listen first. IMO
Efficiency or effectiveness? There is a differenceQuote:
THE GOAL OF THE FOUNDERS OF THE STYLE WAS ONLY EFFICIENCY
Sure, outside of fighting, whats the measurement?Quote:
MY QUESTION REFERS ONLY TO THIS GOAL AND WHAT MAKE THE LINK IN PRACTICE
(skill and ability and NOT formal through a book .paper or A OATH)
WITH YIP MAN ,LEUNG CHAN AND SO...
Ok, but refer to what?Quote:
IT CANNOT BE BASED AND OUR OWN EVALUATION AND EXPERIENCE ,WITHOUT KNOWING TO WHAT TO REFER ...
But how can you? I just dont see how anyone can say they have the full, original system. Wether they do or not, how do you prove that?Quote:
SO FOR THE MASTERS X ,Y OR Z ... WHAT CAN MAKE FULLY LEGITIMATE TO REFER TO THE ANCESTORS ?
I am going to say this again because it is worth repeating in a slightly different way. If you are wondering if you have the "real deal" or not it is pretty simple. You should feel like your art has been used in actual combat and developed over generations.
Even if you could legitimately trace your lineage back to shaolin or whatever, if you don't feel like you are learning what you need to be able to defend yourself in all settings that the art was designed for, your link to the past has been severed.
A style becomes a style because somebody presumably fought and won with it at some point. If a lineage loses it's ability to fight, it is no longer connected to the past as a fighting art. It has become low-level aerobics.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A lot is fiction but one needs to know how to sift through data. Sure fighting ability is an important key- but this is just a chat forum. Can't take everything here seriously.
Is this thread limited only to Ip Man lineage, or ALL wing chun? I ask because not all WC practitioners are from Ip Man, my lineage included. The OP didn't specify one way or another..
Can the OP clarify what he is asking? (I'd rather hear from the OP not joy with his assumptions and thread dictatorship)
I DIDNT WRITE WHO ARE THE ANCESTORS BUT WHAT IS THE LINK ?
yes others lineages can share their experience and perhaps have the same answer to the question
"For those who considered to have received the whole system, can you simply explained , how your sifu have certified the link to the ancestors"
The link is the system itself. Can you produce the same results in your students as your sifu did and his sifu did before him? I'm not talking about "sifu X's way of doing things" but more "this is what the system teaches us"
The certified link is the transmision of the system as a whole from generation to generation. If you are interpretting the concepts/principles differently then your sifu or his sifu, then IMO, the link is already broken - You are doing your own personal style of WC. If the system stays intact, the ideas should not change and there should be no room for interpretation like this.
An example could be to look at a lot of WC today, even on this same forum (and sometimes from those of the same lineage/sigung!). We see a lot of different people dissagreeing and arguing on what is the 'correct' way. If the system stays intact, there should be no argument.
From my own experience, any time I have doubt, I can usually look at the system for the answer vs. asking 'hey, how did sifu show us to do that again?' (of course that gets asked too, but that never really give the clear answer and then I realize I'm just asking the wrong questions). And if my sihings and I have a dissagrement or confusion on something conceptually, most of the time the system can again give us the answer. That is the beauty of science behing WC, at least from what I've learned!
And yes, it also helps to have sifu point the way! And what I found is, his answers are not because of 'how he prefers to do things' or 'how my sifu showed it like this', it's always only to point back to the system and the principles/laws of nature.
Now, all that said, the tricky part is verifying what your sifu's sifu got and if what you have is the same. ;) On that I can only go back to what I said originally - if you can photocopy the blueprint of the system as your sifu understands it and pass it on the same way, the link is intact.
Too bad a photocopy of your Sifu was never the intent. The system isn't designed that way. Follow the principles and it will become your own, to your specific body type, whenever it is that you become proficient in it of course. A good Sifu will be able to see two different people doing what to the novice looks completely different and confirm they're doing the same thing... hence one of the contributions to the western state of confusion...
Why too bad? I think it's a good thing the intent is not to photocopy your sifu! The way he does things is his own style, and not always a direct reflection of the entire system. If we just copy sifu or his style, we miss what WC is really all about, things get lost, etc :)
I agree, but again, IMO, this is just your own personal style and how you as an idividual 'use' or demonstrate the system. To then pass this on to a student would cause a break in the 'link' moshe referrs to and isn't passing along 'the system' - just one's own style and personal preferrences. IMO this is what causes all the differences and arguments we see today among WC practitioners
I was being sarcastic with the 'too bad' :D
You misunderstood or I didn't explain it well enough. My point is that the Sifu's understanding and principles are what really matters and a good one can see past the personal expressions and verify the 'big picture' of the student, so to speak. The one who doesn't get 'the big picture' is just going to try to emulate which IMO is the majority of WC Sifu's out there currently.
Connection to ancestors... lineage... You can only go so far back when tracing the background of the training method you follow. The further you go back, the blurrier the picture becomes as not every relationship and every detail is documented.
Ving Tsun was developed by evolving over time, changing with each exponent. Early Ving Tsun versions were probably a far cry from what current practitioners train and teach today. Each exponent took what he learned from his teacher and passed on his interpretation of these teachings together with his personal experience to his students - sometimes for better, sometimes for worse. It suffices to look at your classmates to realize the wide range of skill and understanding that can be found even within the same lineage. Is it then worth to even spend time talking about lineage? Yeah, as it allows you to understand the historic factors that contributed to what you are learning. However, claiming this or that lineage as "authentic" (whatever that means in light of the evolution of Ving Tsun) is futile, as understanding and skill are not inherited.
Lineage claims are not so important in my book (even though they provide some background on what you may expect). I prefer evaluating Ving Tsun through the lens of 2 factors:
1.) The bottomline, does it work under realistic circumstances? Am I training attributes that are of value in a fight and that increase my chances for survival?
2.) Is the method adhering to the fighting strategies of Ving Tsun and the body mechanics tied to these? Is this done in a way that maximizes my potential?
Good fighting methods in general (boxing, MT, MMA, etc.) meet the first, good Ving Tsun meets both.
Moshe is not formulating his question in a way that everyone would easily understand.While of course he is happy with his wing chun he is not being sarcastic... he has not been much of a participant in the forums. Some may have missed an earlier thread on Ng Chan --who did live with Ip man for a while and taught for him.
Moshe is from France but has settled in Israel.
There are many ways of fighting-wing chun is not the only available option. I may be wrong- but Moshe seems to be interested in the inter-related questions of how we are linked to a fairly complete version of Ip Man's wing chun other than name dropping and how do we know that what we do is "efficient".
I think that Ng Chan got a very good piece of Ip Man's wing chun- in a traditional way-personal instruction... but there are several others.Moshe's sifu in turn got in depth regular personal instruction from his sifu Ng Chan..Ditto for Moshe from his sifu.The occasional seminar was not the method of learning for Moshe, his sifu or sigung.
I wont critique Ng Chan's wing chun at this time-I hope that he can articulate his questions better
and receive some answers without the common sarcastic overtones that are common at KFo.
One hopes for something resembling a dialog..
Im of the same thought Joy, just wish he could be clearer what he saysQuote:
I wont critique Ng Chan's wing chun at this time-I hope that he can articulate his questions better
and receive some answers without the common sarcastic overtones that are common at KFo.
One hopes for something resembling a dialog.
Joy,
Maybe it would be better to let moshe speak for himself - IMO he's doing fine by himself.
Moshe NEVER mentioned his sifu or the name Ng Chan (and not even Ip Man until much later after you started pushing it). Since he never mentioned Ng Chan, maybe it would help if you just stop 'helping him' when you might admittedly have it all wrong anway and could be viewed as further confusing and derailing the thread yourself with all your assumptions.