Rene - HFY Champion!

[Chango]

Rene,
Maybe you did not catch the listing of Yip man lineages on the VTM web site?!

RENE wrote:I don't believe HFY claims YMWCK doesn't go back to Shaolin; I believe that is what the VTM is claiming


C- The VTM does provide the Ng mui story and that some say she was a female Shaolin monk. So we must not point the finger at the VTM or HFY for making claims on the Yipman lineage. I think the dispute about the denial of Wing Chun's shaolin roots would be HindricK Santo's thread!

Chango

[Chango]

Hello,
David maybe if you share a bit more of how you recieved the information presented to you at the HFY siminar. Members of the HFY family can help you better grasp what the HFY system is comunicating?!! I think the entire forum could benifit from this excercise. What do you say?


Chango (saat geng sau)

[InfiniteApogee]

Originally posted by William E
What I am saying Clark is that I cannot speak for Sifu Lowenhagen with regards to what he meant by "directional and dimensional" in relation to don chi sau.

William E.

You have a point there. I was assuming all HFY people used the same terminology when describing things. I could be wondering about this too much. I'll let it go and try to think of something more constructive to ask.

Clark

[InfiniteApogee]

Originally posted by taltos
What I mean is, there truly is no "taan," "gum," "paak," etc. if you are not in motion and not interacting with a secondary object. As such, in the postition you are describing, since there is no motion, there is no "taan" and "gum."

-Levi [/B]

So it's not the position of the hand that makes a technique a technique, but what or how it's being used? I understand that! WOW. So if you guys are using a hand that 'looks like a tan but are doing something un-tan like, for instance pushing an arm down instead of dispersing it to the side, you would not call that a tan, even though it looks like one, because it's not being used like one's supposded to be? Am I right? That would explain one phrase I saw somewhere about having a perfect tan sau, or only one true tan sau, or something like that. If I 'm right, what this statement would mean is that if you're doing something with a tan, that is different than what hfy would describe as a tan's useage, than you wouldn't call it a tan, you would call it something else. Not that that usage would be wrong but that you wouldn't call it a tan.

Am I close? I hope so because I've been thinking about this for the past little bit since I read your post and this is what I've got so far.

Thanks for sharing. If I'm understanding correctly, I might actually get some idea of what hfy people are talking about

Clark

[Mckind13]

Chango,

I am not sure what you are asking but I'll give it a try.

If you clarify your question I'll post a response.

Thanks

David

[reneritchie]

InfiniteApogee,

Thank you for continuing to participate!

This is actually something you will find in many WCK lineages. Names like "Tan" do not apply to specific hand shapes, but to actions involving specific hand motions. The shape at the end can be arrived to through various paths, and each of those paths can serve a different function.

For example, just with the palm up and out in front of you you might have performed a path action for:

outside Tan (dispersed to the outside)
inside Tan (dispersed to the inside)
outside Fook (control)
inside Fook (control)
Ding (upward butt, aka Tok)
inside high Gaun (tilling)
etc.

Unless a bridge is actively engaged, all sorts of potentials exist.

[reneritchie]

Chango,

I apologize, perhaps I was distracted by the geneology section listing HFY and CS rightfully as Shaolin derived, but YM as Hong Kong derived. Or perhaps it was the article attempting to debunk the Ng Mui story, and the Ng Mui story alone (unless follow ups on Jee Shim and Yat Chum are awaiting publication to maintain the appearence of unbiased, even, and fair representation?)

But this thread isn't about the VTM, as I've repeatedly said, it's about HFY, so please don't allow me to distract you from answering the remaining questions, or merely chatting and engendering some good will.

[reneritchie]

Brian,

Thank you very much for joining the thread. However, as it is not a Victor or TWC thread, I respectfully ask that you bring up Victor and TWC on Victor's excellent TWC thread, and here contrain yourself to HFY and the Q&A format.

A scorpion holding up the thumb on the frogway, etc.