Hung sing, buk sing, or Chan?

[hskwarrior]

Now, people always think because the fut san people stand up for what we believe in that we are always making trouble.

Well, as i said in the past, but won't repeat it here, Chan Family seems to be behind schedule when it comes to Jeung Hung Sing, even placing him in the picture at a later date than when he was really there. if we keep letting Chan Family members tell our story, then our history would be dead and forgotten.

For us, we examine our CLF and compare it to Chan Family.....anyone in the chan family......and we just don't see any connection to them at all. Most of the individual chan family branches including the lee koon hung lineage all have extremely identifiable elements that say they are Chan Family. Nothing like this could be said about the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon.

When i think about it, it could have very well been nothing but FUT GA that Jeung Hung Sing was teaching since the Green Grass Monk was his most major influence. This link could very well be found in the Bak Hsing Fut Ga, we could have also been Hung Sing Fut Ga.

Regardless, I don't see any connection between the Fut San and CHan Family styles of CLF. if i just don't see it, can someone tell me why I have to believe in someone i don't feel has anything to do with my family?

CLF is the tree, but no tree only has ONE root. there are many many roos that make up that tree.

Until the CLF community accepts Chan Heung, Jeung Hung Sing, and Tam Sam as CLF's founders, there will never be unity. Not completely. yeah will always support each other. but there will always be division until that changes.

Now, in the bigger CLF picture, history is only a small aspect and should never overshadow the evolution of CLF. We all have the same 10 seeds, its how each one of them are used that separates us all. Not one branch uses the same techniques exactly alike. always some form of modification.

[extrajoseph]

Until the CLF community accepts Chan Heung, Jeung Hung Sing, and Tam Sam as CLF's founders, there will never be unity. Not completely. yeah will always support each other. but there will always be division until that changes.

Now, in the bigger CLF picture, history is only a small aspect and should never overshadow the evolution of CLF. We all have the same 10 seeds, its how each one of them are used that separates us all. Not one branch uses the same techniques exactly alike. always some form of modification.

Frank,

Before Chan Heung came along there is no CLF, Jeong Yim came after and Tarm Sam after him. You have forgotten there is a time line in history.

There are many ways to express the same principles or seeds of CLF, and it is vital that we have the freedom to express them, but let us respect the originator of these principles or seeds in Chan Heung and pay respect to Jeong Yim as a loyal disciple who contributed greatly to the development of CLF. He was not the instigator, Chan Heung was. A founder of a branch of CLF do not equate to the founder of a whole system.

History do not over shadow the evolution of CLF, history IS the evolution of CLF. Keep track of it and we will keep track of our past, our present and our future. Destroy our history and it will destroy us.

XJ

[Yao Sing]

Pls, bro, don't assume I don't know anything about the other branches of CLF. My lineage isn't the only one I have researched. I've learned what I could about Buk Sing, and Chan Family. Do I need to learn their gung fu? No. I am just fine with what I've been learning for most of my life.

I wasn't talking about learning their version of history, I meant learning their interpretation of CLF.

For us, we examine our CLF and compare it to Chan Family.....anyone in the chan family......and we just don't see any connection to them at all.

Sorry, I don't understand. You feel they're NOT CLF? Don't the fist seeds connect all CLF?

Regardless, I don't see any connection between the Fut San and CHan Family styles of CLF.
<clip>
We all have the same 10 seeds, its how each one of them are used that separates us all. Not one branch uses the same techniques exactly alike. always some form of modification.

Seems like a bit of a contradiction - no connection at all but have the same 10 seeds. That sounds like a connection to me.

I also don't understand how 2 branches can use the same fists totally different. I think the difference in small but exaggerated. Can someone offer specifics?

Is a Sow Choy used differently from one branch to the next? If not how are they used differently? I'm just not buying it.

[Yao Sing]

I do a different style of CMA but I bet that every fist that is in Hung Sing or Chan Family that is also in my style is used about the same. Unless someone has a use that I haven't seen or heard about yet. In which case I'll just steal the idea and start using that way and then there still won't be a difference.

Tell me how Hung Sing uses a Gwa Choy, how Chan Fmily uses a Gwa Choy and we'll see if it's similar to how I would use my Gwa Choy.

[Lama Pai Sifu]

I wasn't talking about learning their version of history, I meant learning their interpretation of CLF.



Sorry, I don't understand. You feel they're NOT CLF? Don't the fist seeds connect all CLF?



Seems like a bit of a contradiction - no connection at all but have the same 10 seeds. That sounds like a connection to me.

I also don't understand how 2 branches can use the same fists totally different. I think the difference in small but exaggerated. Can someone offer specifics?

Is a Sow Choy used differently from one branch to the next? If not how are they used differently? I'm just not buying it.

Of course there are just subtle differences...how much do you think they can actually change??? It's hysterical....

[hskwarrior]

again, if we don't practice nor teach chan family material in any way, and don't view the latter as our founder. so why should we acknowledge chan heung as founder of all clf?

[extrajoseph]

again, if we don't practice nor teach chan family material in any way, and don't view the latter as our founder. so why should we acknowledge chan heung as founder of all clf?

Then you are not doing CLF, you are doing Futshan Kuen or Hung Sing Kuen or something like that, just don't use the name CLF and it is fine with us.

[CLFNole]

Jeong Yim had to start somewhere, right? What is wrong with giving Chan Hueng credit in that? The buk sing people don't seem to have any problem saying that Tam Sam was a founder of his own branch of CLF and came from Jeong Yim's line, what is wrong with hung sing people saying the same thing?

If there is no relation and Chan Heung's style is called CLF then hung sing shouldn't be referred to as CLF. Now we all know this is ridiculous but you understand my point.

It is no big deal to say where you came from, as it does nothing to take away from things you have accomplished.

[extrajoseph]

CLFNole,

You are really a CLF Noble! You are so right when you said, "It is no big deal to say where you came from, as it does nothing to take away from things you have accomplished". Chan Heung did the same, he has to start somewhere, so instead of calling the system Choy Lee Chan, he called it Choy Lee Fut and used the last character Fut to honour the source of his art from the Shaolin Temple, as well as the first character Choy for Choy Fook and the second character Lee for Lee Yau Shan.

XJ

[Eric Olson]

Then you are not doing CLF, you are doing Futshan Kuen or Hung Sing Kuen or something like that, just don't use the name CLF and it is fine with us.

How bout Fut Ga Zhong Zheng or whatever the name was? It can be its own style....or how 'bout Jeung Yim Do (sorry I couldn't resist.)

EO

[Lama Pai Sifu]

How bout Fut Ga Zhong Zheng or whatever the name was? It can be its own style....or how 'bout Jeung Yim Do (sorry I couldn't resist.)

EO

I think they meant Faht Ga Jing Jong (Pure tradition Buddhist Family/Style)

Everyone keeps combining Mandarin and Cantonese Romanization....UG!

[tungmojingjung]

It appears to me, and my level of understanding, according to our elders (Futsan Hung Sing in China) that Jeung Yim studied from Lee Yau San as a Young man, before learning from Chan Heung before studying from our beloved Monk Green Grass. According to our elders (Futsan Hung Sing in China) Lee Yau San and Chan Heung enable Jeung Yim to have a firm foundation in kung fu which allowed him to really comprehend Monk Green Grass instructions.

After Jeung Yim's tenure with Monk Ching Cho he went back and shared his new skills (what he learned) with Chan Heung. Later Jeung Yim would develop his skills according to his understanding and experiences, although maintaining the same foundational skills as Chan and perhaps even Lee Yau San.

Many schools have similar seed techniques or foundation training, I really don't believe thats a major argument. I really don't believe its too far fetched to believe that Jeung Yim designed his Choy Lee fut different than Chan Heung.

I believe Chan Heung and Lee Yau San should be considered as ancestral kung fu fathers, considering Jeung Yim, never completed or exhausted Chan Heung teachings and i'm sure Jeung Yim had great admiration for both teachers, yet what we have today is a result of Jeung Yim's knowledge and experiences expressed in a combative form.

Jeung Yim went on to develop his techniques different from what he previously learned and promoted that, thereby Futsan Hung Sing in China taking on a different feel, flavor and mentality in comparison to Chan Heung. Not saying anyone branch is wrong or right, just different, which could be based on age, mentality, understanding etc.

I think in the end Chan Heung should be acknowledged as an ancestral kung fu father figure just as Lee Yau San and Monk Green Grass, however as we know what we do, Jeung Yim once again was our architect, formulator or founder or however one wishes to put it, interlocking the skills and techniques concepts and principles into what we know today as Futsan Hung Sing Choy Lee Fut Gung Fu.

I think it is just as important to identify our (any) branch as it is one having his or her own name, it identifies and shows your roots, there is also the matter of reputation and legacy. Our founder Jeung Yim was a revolutionary hero, one that gave tirelessly of himself for the good of his country, that was invaded by foreign oppresors, thats the legacy we have inherited from Great Master Jeung Yim, to Master Yuen Hai, to Master Lau Bun, to Master Jew Leong to Master Dino Salvatera which is continually being promoted now through his efforts. Now who wouldn't be proud to wear that on their chest, thats who we are and forever shall be.

This is in no way to take any thing from any other branch or school of choy lee fut, but as my Sifu says we know our own history best as I am sure others know there own. If I truly want to know something about David, I need not go to Sam, I must go to David, our information comes from our elders that we feel are as credible as the Buk Sing elders and the Chan Family elders.

In the end I think it suffices that we are truly different, diversity not divisive, and that great diversity should be celebrated on a common level where all may be exalted and glorified.

May The Spirit Of Real Kung Fu Be With Us All.



Troy Dunwood
Hung Sing Goon
Oakland East Bay Branch

[extrajoseph]

Dear Troy,

Please tell us what techniques that Jeung Yim have developed that were different to Chan Heung? You and Frank keep saying that Jeung and Chan are not the same, but never identify the actual principles or seeds except in stylistic differences.

All the information that you have are comimg from Futsan in the last 10 years or less. Did your Si Tai Gung Prof. Lau Bun said the same thing? No!

Futsan has a vested interest to promote their own agenda, please don't fall for it. No one deny that you have your own root, we have one too and we share that root with you in Chan Heung, without taking out the glory from Jeung Yim, who was one of us and so are you.

XJ

[hskwarrior]

the green grass monk was jeung yims major influence since jeung yim studied longer with ggm than he did with chan heung. we want to honor ggm..and chan heung.....in that order....joseph, we dont practice what you practice. plain and simple.

[extrajoseph]

Apart from hearsake from Futsan, please show us some historical eveidence that Jeung Yim did studied with Lee Yau-Shan as a young man and that the GGM did exist. Jeung Yim's village and birthplace is still there, if there are evidence, we should have founded them by now.