Another look at Wing Chun History/Mystery

[t_niehoff]

I have never make the claim that Yik Kam's SLT is the original.

the point is we know now both WWB and YK is doing ONE LONG FORM, not three form. That means in the Red Boat, it is true that One Long form was taught.

I never understood Hendrik to make the claim that Yik Kam WCK was the "true original" WCK (unlike others), only that on the Red Boats the SLT was originally one set.

It seemed likely that it was Wong Wah Bo that choreographed the three sets (SLT, CK, BJ) considering that his two students, Leung Jan and Fok Bo Cheung, both subsequently taught the same three sets.

IMO WCK existed on the Red Boats, and that there existed several different types of curriculum for teaching it also on the Red Boat (one form, three forms, san sik).

[KPM]

My name is Danny Chao and the Leung Jan student you speak of Chao Lo Kwai is my ancestor. To avoid some misinformation I will provide what short answer on what we preserve.

We practice 4 forms plus dummy ,pole and knife. The 3 forms as known plus one long form derived from the original long form taught by Wong Wah Bo.

In our passed down writings it is said Leung Yee Tai taught from shorter San Sik and Wong Wah Bo taught from one long form. Leung Jan learned from both. He worked with Wong Wah Bo to combine the teachings of his two Sifu. This resulted in the 3 forms as practiced today.

This is what we preserve but it does not mean it is correct . I wish not to argue with those that have a belief in something else.

Thanks for posting this! It makes good sense. We may never be able to prove it from an historical standpoint, but it helps to explain a lot of things.

[Wayfaring]

The thread of Wing Chun is a fusion of Snake and Crane is well known. Wing Chun with Emei /kwan Xi connection is also well know via YKS and Koo Lo lineage.

http://www.wingchunkuen.com/modules....ery=miu%20shun



There is nothing new but the truth get closer and closer.

The lineage in that link originates from Ng Mui the nun. Which the vast majority of researchers regard as a myth as opposed to a real person.

How exactly does this cause the "truth get closer and closer" and prove your snake / crane fusion theory?

[t_niehoff]

The lineage in that link originates from Ng Mui the nun. Which the vast majority of researchers regard as a myth as opposed to a real person.

I can't imagine any intelligent, informed person believing that the Ng Mui story is factually true. It is an allegory, a story used to illustrate something.

There is no good evidence anywhere -- none -- that provides any proof of WCK's existence prior to the Red Boats. I think all the available evidence points to WCK originating on the Red Boats in the early 1800s. Everything else is either theory or legend.

Origin legends are just that -- legends up to when they can be independently verified with good, sound evidence.

How exactly does this cause the "truth get closer and closer" and prove your snake / crane fusion theory?

We will never know where, how, etc. WCK originated. Theories are just that -- theories. They are attempts to take what we do know and extrapolate backwards in time. Hendrik's theory is a possibility, a sound possibility. But I can think of other possibilities too.

In the end analysis, it is all mental m@sturbation.

[Hendrik]

1, The lineage in that link originates from Ng Mui the nun. Which the vast majority of researchers regard as a myth as opposed to a real person.

2, How exactly does this cause the "truth get closer and closer" and

3,prove your snake / crane fusion theory?

1, Without a real person to do the job, WCK will not happen as any real human being knows.

however, Ng Mui is just a nick name of the person who brought White crane from Fujian into the WCK creation. Ng Mui is just a symbol of White Crane from Fujian. What important is to know the White Crane fujian source.



2, One long form in the red boat era at the WWB, Yik Kam generation. if one's WCK branch out from the post LJ-WWB time, then One long form is a teaching method.


3, Snake and crane fusion is not my theory but ancestors' passed down in WCK lineages.

Evidences speak for themselves.
Even VTM today has already confirm the White Crane of fujian connection, not to mention in ASIA White Crane of fujian with WCK connection is a known fact.

the snake signature is all over the sets of WCK be it in the long form which was taught in the Red boat era pre Leung Jan, and Leung Jan -WWB creation of the three sets including the Koo Lo no sets.





My part of description including the one set in post WWB era has one by one confirmed since last decades, with more and more WCK lineage open up and reveal their inheritance.




Now the question is for you and your team who believe in Shao Lin WCK as the original WCK, who keep posting the anti- one long set of WCK in Red boat era in this forum.

how is your Shao lin fit into the pictures? Which Shao Lin (presume there is a shao lin which shao lin? what type of art?).?

why it is you are practicing post WWB ( after 1850) 3 sets and missing the pre WWB (1840) one long set? isnt it the burning of Shao lin and down fall of Ming as you claim is in 1650's? so why are you follow the LJ-WWB invention?

why is it White Crane of Fujian is in WCK instead of Shao Lin (presume there is a shao lin which shao lin? what type of art?).......?



if you can explain what you claim, that will be created contribute to the Truth of WCK.
if you cant explain with evidence on your part, isnt that a good contribution to the truth of WCK too?


and with the following announcement


"Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Paai in their position that their lineage traces back to time period Hung Gun Biu, and has nothing to do with the flag system based secret societies that came out of the Shaolin Temple. There is published evidence from many researchers in the 1800s, 1900s, and 2000s supporting the existence of the flag system in the founding of the Hung Men. The VTM will no longer promote the Hung Fa Yi system under the umbrella term of Shaolin Wing Chun, and will no longer state that this lineage traces its origins directly back to the origins of Wing Chun in the Southern Shaolin Temple, and is – instead – the creation of one person: Si Jo Hung Gun Biu."

http://mengsmartialarts.com/forum/in...pic,980.0.html

Does it mean Hung Gar Bui exist in the time after LJ-WWB? at the time Lee Man Mau leads the uprising after 1850?

[Wayfaring]

however, Ng Mui is just a nick name of the person who brought White crane from Fujian into the WCK creation. Ng Mui is just a symbol of White Crane from Fujian. What important is to know the White Crane fujian source.

So in your "proof", there is a mythical person who is a legend, but don't pay attention to that part of the proof?

2, One long form in the red boat era at the WWB, Yik Kam generation. if one's WCK branch out from the post LJ-WWB time, then One long form is a teaching method.

A bunch of speculation on one vs. three and timelines. We know one teacher did this, but not what happened in all other famillies.

3, Snake and crane fusion is not my theory but ancestors' passed down in WCK lineages.

Evidences speak for themselves.

The evidence that speaks for itself is apparantly you are somewhat mixed up betwen the words "theory", "evidence", and "fact".

Even VTM today has already confirm the White Crane of fujian connection, not to mention in ASIA White Crane of fujian with WCK connection is a known fact.

the snake signature is all over the sets of WCK be it in the long form which was taught in the Red boat era pre Leung Jan, and Leung Jan -WWB creation of the three sets including the Koo Lo no sets.

Sorry - I don't really follow VTM conclusions. They've proven to have a great deal of bias involved with research. But then again that seems to be the norm for WCK in general.

My part of description including the one set in post WWB era has one by one confirmed since last decades, with more and more WCK lineage open up and reveal their inheritance.

Yes. And some you like, and others you don't like so much. Your bias.

Now the question is for you and your team who believe in Shao Lin WCK as the original WCK, who keep posting the anti- one long set of WCK in Red boat era in this forum.

how is that Shao lin fit into the pictures? Which Shao Lin (presume there is a shao lin which shao lin? what type of art?).?

No idea. We have some more clear oral tradition from Hung Gun Biu. Prior to that oral tradition connection to Cheung Ng. Other than that, I'll ask more of the historians like my sifu next time I see him.

why it is you are practicing post WWB ( after 1850) 3 sets and missing the pre WWB (1840) one long set? isnt it the burning of Shao lin and down fall of Ming as you claim is in 1650's?

Who says it's missing? Even the stories you have says it gets split for teaching purposes even if all was combined first.

why is it White Crane of Fujian is in WCK instead of Shao Lin (presume there is a shao lin which shao lin? what type of art?).......?

I'm not much of a historian, but in most of what I have heard, I thought that during the Ming dynasty, which is somewhat correlated to the Rennaisance period in Europe, that in a similar fashion to how Rennaisance artists all knew each other and collaborated, so did the martial artists of southern China. Through the flow in and out of the temples as religious centers also are community centers, people trained together and exchanged ideas. Today they just all argue on the Internet and never spar together.

if you can explain what you claim, that will be created contribute to the Truth of WCK.
if you cant explain with evidence on your part, isnt that a good contribution to the truth of WCK too?

I don't claim anything. I see a huge disparity in what I call evidence and what you call evidence. I just share a few stories from my limited knowledge of my family WCK and oral traditions and the application of it.

[Hendrik]

I see a huge disparity in what I call evidence and what you call evidence.

I just share a few stories from my limited knowledge of my family WCK and oral traditions and the application of it.

I dont claim I know it all , I shared what I know, just that simple.

if everyone focus their own issues and get that clear,
that will be a great help to WCK.

I leave this discussion here and

hope you to show us more evidence support your family's stories soon.

[Wayfaring]

"Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun Paai in their position that their lineage traces back to time period Hung Gun Biu, and has nothing to do with the flag system based secret societies that came out of the Shaolin Temple. There is published evidence from many researchers in the 1800s, 1900s, and 2000s supporting the existence of the flag system in the founding of the Hung Men. The VTM will no longer promote the Hung Fa Yi system under the umbrella term of Shaolin Wing Chun, and will no longer state that this lineage traces its origins directly back to the origins of Wing Chun in the Southern Shaolin Temple, and is – instead – the creation of one person: Si Jo Hung Gun Biu."

http://mengsmartialarts.com/forum/in...pic,980.0.html

Does it mean Hung Gar Bui exist in the time after LJ-WWB? at the time Lee Man Mau leads the uprising after 1850?

First, it is Hung Gun Biu. Second, that name is an alias of some sort - "Red Bandana" Biu.

Next, from the MKF book p. 28 the lineage is:

Cheung Ng (Tan Sau Ng)->Chang Jing Lin->Chan Sai Yuan->Chan Bo Jung->Hung Gun Biu.

Other excerpts from the book indicate Hung Gun Biu was during the Red Boats time and taught a public version of his WCK that included SLT and some drilling techniques (p.42).

So congratulations, you've now turned a thread around that has questions about your research and conclusions into something not talking about that at all. That's called "deflection".

So where is the book you wrote that contains all of your research and conclusions? The "evidence", "truth", and "facts"? What is the ISBN? Usually the publishing process includes technical editing which has a process in place for checking references are accurate and sources.

Because, after all,

if you can explain what you claim, that will be created contribute to the Truth of WCK.
if you cant explain with evidence on your part, isnt that a good contribution to the truth of WCK too?

[Hendrik]

you've now turned a thread around that has questions about your research and conclusions into something not talking about that at all. That's called "deflection".

1, this thread starts with questioning YK WCK and the one long SLT set. Questioning Yik Kam ......etc. it is not about discussing my research.

Trying to create a case to make ONE LONG SLT set YK transmit incomplete or unlegitimate with one's bias assumption.

Originally Posted by JPinAZ View Post

Also, how can most all other lines that draw down from Yim Wing Chun, or even Wong Wah Bo (Yik Kam's senior) already have 3 hand forms ...

why do we not see that in any other line but the one coming from YK? And if the 1 form got split into 3, why is it still one from only in YK WC? ....

(And this isn't even taking into account those lines that don't trace back thru WWB or red boats that also have the 3 traditional forms.)

and

what we find out from other neutral WCK older lineage is that ONE LONG SET is the pre LJ - WWB practice in the Red boat before the existance of the three sets concept which is responsible by WWB and LJ.


So, the conclusion is YK is legitimate and Cho family tradition is following the Pre WWB-LJ tradition.



2, since the title of this thread is "Another look at Wing Chun History/Mystery" communication goes two ways.

My ancestors identity and teaching and art is open for discussion as above under the bright sun.
so does your ancestors identity, teaching, and art right?

so, it is your time to find evidence to support your story for every WCK lineage is equal.
There is nothing beyond the title of this thread for looking into your ancestors past.




However, I can understand, if your mentality is just a one way street, and entertainment try to pick at other's ancestors but keep an upper hand,
then please dont discuss because you might be not able to support your story under the sun.

So, you dont have to participate in this discussion, that is OK with me. and I rest my discussion here.

[Wayfaring]

what we find out from other neutral WCK older lineage is that ONE LONG SET is the pre LJ - WWB practice in the Red boat before the existance of the three sets concept which is responsible by WWB and LJ.


So, the conclusion is YK is legitimate and Cho family tradition is following the Pre WWB-LJ tradition.

Good thing you posted this logic, as it pretty much preserves the way you "prove" something or come to conclusions.

In the real world, we found another oral account of one long set being taught by one WCK family, that is all.

2, since the title of this thread is "Another look at Wing Chun History/Mystery" communication goes two ways.

My ancestors identity and teaching and art is open for discussion as above under the bright sun.
so does your ancestors identity, teaching, and art right?

so, it is your time to find evidence to support your story for every WCK lineage is equal.
There is nothing beyond the title of this thread for looking into your ancestors past.

No, if you're trying to use the words "prove", "evidence", "conclusion", "fact", in reality it's your time to write up your conclusions in a book and present us with the ISBN so we can be sure that facts are checked in the common manner as happens with the publishing cycle.

I already quoted you a book with an ISBN, and oral tradition. Now, your turn.

However, I can understand, if your mentality is just a one way street, and entertainment try to pick at other's ancestors but keep an upper hand,
then please dont discuss because you might be not able to support your story under the sun.

So, you dont have to participate in this discussion, that is OK with me. and I rest my discussion here.

I can understand if you are used to traveling down a one way street and not looking where you are going like you are, that when you see other traffic you might be really sensitive and think someone is trying to run you over.

However, in reality the street has two ways.

[Hendrik]

I already quoted you a book with an ISBN, and oral tradition.

ISBN and oral tradition means the truth?

Great to know your logic.

Thanks!

[Eric_H]

Being published means you have to have sources. Your sources will be checked. This independent verification leads to higher credibility.

When something is oral tradition, it needs to be designated as such. This does not mean it is true or untrue, merely that it has not been verified.

In the Yik Kam story here are the disputed items:

1. Wong Wa Bo wing chun existed at the same time and is a different format.
2. Other Wing Chun doesn't have the snake+crane "signature" that Yik Kam's does.
3. Other Wing Chun has SNT/CK/BJ forms and weapons, Yik Kam's does not.
4. Yik Kam has been reported to have studied arts additional to WCK and imported pieces of those arts into something he called "Yik Kam Siu Lien Tao" - Yik Kam's Drilling Method.

To me, this raises two questions: Why would Yik Kam call his art something other than Wing Chun unless he felt it significantly different to the WCK he had learned? And, why is it so unbelievable that a member of the red boats (martial arts melting pot) would combine several arts together?

[Wayfaring]

ISBN and oral tradition means the truth?

Great to know your logic.

Thanks!

No it does not mean they are truth, it means exactly what I said they are - my sources.

In stating the sources openly and directly, I am not doing what you are - that is, calling something "the truth", "evidence", or "fact" when they are none of the above or not established as such.

Eric's point is exactly right - it's independantly verified. He also did a great job of summarizing the points in the Yik Kam story that are needing sources or have questions related to them.

[Hendrik]

Eric's point is exactly right - it's independantly verified.

He also did a great job of summarizing the points in the Yik Kam story that are needing sources or have questions related to them.

Thanks again for your team logic.

[Wayfaring]

Thanks again for your team logic.

Thanks again for not answering any questions.