Another look at Wing Chun History/Mystery

[taokum]

hendrik claims that yik kam's slt is the original wing chun originating from o-mei and crane. how can this be original wing chun when wong wah bo's wing chun already exsisted prior to yik kam? how can yik kam's wing chun be original when they themselve believe that their ancestor is yim wing chun, the creator of their wing chun? from this position is where I disagree that yik kam's slt is the original wing chun. here's an anology. bruce lee learned wing chun from yip man, and created JKD. but bruce lee never called his martial art original wing chun in front of ip man. in history, yik kam never addressed his self creation yik kam's slt 'excercises' (o-mei + crane) as original wing chun in front of wong wah bo and leung yee tai. how could yik kam make such claim if yim wing chun and wong wah bo already existed prior to yik kam?

the history of wing chun has always been muddy, some claim chi sim as the creator, some claim yim wing chun etc...some new version of wing chun which mixed with o-mei, crane, hung ga or ngo cho kun, later also come to make a lot noise about being the orginal wing chun. that is the most rediculous claim. that's like claiming the sun rises in the west. saying wing chun came from omei and crane knowing that wong wah bo's wing chun existed before yik kam contradicts known history. all of this evidence shows that wing chun history with any association to omei and crane is false and totally absurd.

All this evidence on Omei doesn’t make sense to Santos his-story so he (Hendrik) is looking for shelter under Benny Meng. Looking to VTM to vouch his(Hendrik's) Omei opinion. I think Benny Meng is only interested in promoting 5 flag wing chun but even Benny Meng is having difficulty to vouch himself in the true martial arts community. 5 flag wing chun never exist in history. The real 5 flags society is well document as bandits.

[chusauli]

For the record, Hendrik has never made any claims of Yik Kam SLT as the "original" form. Also, he does not publicly teach, nor interested in commercial schools or making money in WCK.

And he was kind enough to share with Ku Choi Wah and other Cho family members.

His POV is based on documents passed down from Cho Hung Choi and his own extensive research in the martial arts world.

We should be grateful there is a completely verifiable and documented source of WCK passed on down through Yik Kam.

[Hendrik]

All this evidence on Omei doesn’t make sense to Santos his-story so he (Hendrik) is looking for shelter under Benny Meng. Looking to VTM to vouch his(Hendrik's) Omei opinion. I think Benny Meng is only interested in promoting 5 flag wing chun but even Benny Meng is having difficulty to vouch himself in the true martial arts community. 5 flag wing chun never exist in history. The real 5 flags society is well document as bandits.

1, I dont shelter under whom. in the past decades, I speak for myself. tell the same story and never changes but more and more details are added when time passed. YOu like it you dont like it that is fine with me. Those who truely practice SLT everyday for more then 20 years will appreciate my view, those are who I share with.

2, What you think about Benny Meng is your own view. Even if he is a business man, that doesnt make the truth he speaks false.

3, If VTM is a research organization, then VTM cannot avoid to go the direction of Emei 12 Zhuang after the admitting of White Crane of Fujian today.

4, VTM might change later as they find out more, similar to the case of the previous Shao Lin Wing Chun now become a Hung Gun Biu Wing Chun which they publicly address.

5, You seem to hate Benny and the 5 flag soo much. Why dont you post your real name and lineage and address your view toward Benny publicly, that way you have your chance to say what you want to say and he has a chance to defend or clarify what he thinks. And you still dont have to buy what he thinks but doing it in a rational and gentlemen way with Wude.

[Wayfaring]

and how credible is a nick name? tell us, isnt it in your previous post you are totally against Ng Mui...etc and request for real name real person....etc? now it is your time to provide us all the real stuffs as you demand. Again, Wang Wah Bo, Leung Yi Tai, Yik Kam, Cho Soon were all real name and real person you need to get a real identifiable person to get into the list.

On one side of the argument you post "verifiable evidence" with a link to a lineage with Ng Mui in it.

On the other side you attack the credibility of oral tradition that has the nickname or title of one ancestor.

It seems to me your struggle is with yourself. I'll leave you to it.

[Wayfaring]

Joy or me what is the different? your ISBN credibility stuffs doesnt hold and this is a solid example.

Neither you nor Joy disproved the quite well known fact that publishing a book through a commercial publishing company and obtaining an ISBN involves more source checking than online posting. In fact it is surprising to me that Joy is arguing that as he has far too many credentials as a professor at a major university to lend his voice to that argument.

So what exactly about that doesn't hold?

With the addresing from VTM, The book's title needs to change to Hung Gun Biu Wing Chun not Shao Lin Wing Chun which is misleading.

No, the addressing from the VTM was a direct response to a public message from the HFY secretary that despite the VTM changing all references to flags that HFY history does not line up with the black flag research propounded most recently.

In other words, the VTM response you quoted was a politically based response as opposed to genuine research.

[Wayfaring]

His POV is based on documents passed down from Cho Hung Choi and his own extensive research in the martial arts world.

Then let him put the genuine effort into publishing it so that this "extensive research" is documented and checked. You did, and your work with 2 other authors published over 12 years ago still stands.

We should be grateful there is a completely verifiable and documented source of WCK passed on down through Yik Kam.

I would be grateful too if there was something legitimately out there as opposed to half-thought through excerpts with highly emotional responses and attacks on other lineages who have gone through the effort to do this.

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Wayfaring;1068057]Neither you nor Joy disproved the quite well known fact that publishing a book through a commercial publishing company and obtaining an ISBN involves more source checking than online posting. In fact it is surprising to me that Joy is arguing that as he has far too many credentials as a professor at a major university to lend his voice to that argument.

((Read carefully again.1. Getting an ISBN number and or getting a commercial company to print something does not validate content.All kinds of fairy tales
and opinions and junk can get an ISBN number and or get published. Blind refereed journals and university press books which also have isbn numbers for ordering identification are a differrent breed. There are a few MA books and history books with references to MA that meet that category. None involving wing chun that I know of.2. I did NOT endorse on line chat list posting as scholarship- at any time. 3. I did not say that electronic info is superior to the printed word or vice versa.4.Chat list comments can be suggestive, stimulating, infuriating among other things- but it isn't published research. cause something is printed does not make it true.This is the second time on this thread that you are misrepresenting what I said.))Joy

[Wayfaring]

[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1068105]

Neither you nor Joy disproved the quite well known fact that publishing a book through a commercial publishing company and obtaining an ISBN involves more source checking than online posting. In fact it is surprising to me that Joy is arguing that as he has far too many credentials as a professor at a major university to lend his voice to that argument.

((Read carefully again.1. Getting an ISBN number and or getting a commercial company to print something does not validate content.All kinds of fairy tales
and opinions and junk can get an ISBN number and or get published. Blind refereed journals and university press books which also have isbn numbers for ordering identification are a differrent breed. There are a few MA books and history books with references to MA that meet that category. None involving wing chun that I know of.2. I did NOT endorse on line chat list posting as scholarship- at any time. 3. I did not say that electronic info is superior to the printed word or vice versa.4.Chat list comments can be suggestive, stimulating, infuriating among other things- but it isn't published research. cause something is printed does not make it true.This is the second time on this thread that you are misrepresenting what I said.))Joy

Wow - a little touchy there? I've only responded to your posts twice, and the first one was to ask for clarification on your point. Is asking for clarification misrepresenting you somehow? Please elaborate.

Here - Hendrik is using your statement about ISBN's to substantiate an attack on a book written mostly by my sifu. You are not jumping all over him at all like you are me, so I'm inferring you agree with him.

My position is that at least someone who has gone through the exercise of working with a publisher has more research credibility than someone who has not as there is a process that is adhered to. Are you disagreeing that in the process of publishing that content is not checked? Sounds like you are. Perhaps you need to familiarize yourself a little more with that field, as it seems like in your quote "All kinds of fairy tales and opinions and junk can get an ISBN number and or get published" you are making a quite broad generalization of the overall publishing industry that may only apply to self-published material or material that is published by a non-reputable publisher.

Like it or not, the exercise of getting published does increase credibility.

Also interesting in this discussion, if your position is accurate and getting published is no guarantee of truth now, what about all those sources that were published within the last 300 years that people are basing all of their conclusions currently about WCK history on? How are they any less "all kinds of fairy tales and opinions and junk"?

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=Wayfaring;1068109][QUOTE=Vajramusti;1068105]

Wow - a little touchy there? I've only responded to your posts twice, and the first one was to ask for clarification on your point. Is asking for clarification misrepresenting you somehow? Please elaborate.(Wayfaring)

(( Touchy? No.Both my posts on the subject were quite clear))joy

Here - Hendrik is using your statement about ISBN's to substantiate an attack on a book written mostly by my sifu. You are not jumping all over him at all like you are me, so I'm inferring you agree with him. (Wayfaring)

((I don't think that I "jump" on people. I agree, disagree or ignore specific posts. On crane and snake- Hendrik makes some plausible comments.Ditto on questions of tracing wing chun to a
original shaolin . He seems to be quite clear on Buddhist concepts when he talks about them.
I ignore his "songs".I am unconvinced on some of the claims of energy projection . I do not regard him as an authority on Ip man wing chun. He seems to have raised some legitimate questions about aspects of "history" in the book that you mention. I bought and read the book when it came out and then gave it away. Now Meng seems to have a somewhat different view,
So promotions go on... and are of little interest to me.I have never regarded Meng's place as a research institution. I don't know what flag he will fly tomorrow.

My primary interest is in doing good wing chun---where Ip man led the way- leaving behind some puzzles.While he taught many...he taught only a few in a sustained manner-but the "many" have gone off in different directions-causing a considerable mess in quality control in the present generation. So if your lineage book is important to you-I have no problem with that.
If Hendrik does his Yik Kam wing chun-I have no problem with that either.

BTW I don't wear my academic hat here and never have-though it is mentioned at times by others. I am just a person climbing one wng chun mountain-there are others- but the view is great.
There are supposedly wing chun people now who are into mma-ok with me if that helps them.
I did mma before wc when it was not called mma-but I find understanding wing chun approach to timing, distance, balance, speed, power, combinations, lines, angles, strategy and tactics
enough to keep me busy.Joy Chaudhuri))

[Wayfaring]

On crane and snake- Hendrik makes some plausible comments.Ditto on questions of tracing wing chun to a
original shaolin . He seems to be quite clear on Buddhist concepts when he talks about them.

I agree ideas / comments are plausible - which is a much more realistic word than evidence or fact which I hear often. IMO to state more than it is plausible is a reach.

Snake/crane roots have some possibilities, and they are not mutually exclusive to a shaolin background either with the understanding that a lot of common roots were collaborative in the Ming dynasty between family kung fu teachings and shaolin training. Plausibility does not exclude that either IMO.

But pretty much anything before the red boats seems a lot sketchier to map out, and even in my lineage it's just oral tradition and nothing beyond.

IMO the whole shaolin deal in that book was heavily benny meng influence - included chi sim, etc. you kind of see that difference in the direction he's chosen - now a black flag indonesian wck type art is the real real shaolin. I don't think the shaolin side is so extremely important to my lineage even so there's nothing hugely offensive to saying it's hung gun biu's art. Of course I speak for myself and my understanding only don't know how others feel.

On the Buddhist concept stuff and Hendrik, I'm not a practicing Buddhist so I will defer to others. My observation is he's a little bit of an emotional mess though which I don't really observe that much of in your higher level or more practiced Buddhists I know. All the song lyrics, anger, attachment to snake energy, etc.

My primary interest is in doing good wing chun---where Ip man led the way- leaving behind some puzzles.While he taught many...he taught only a few in a sustained manner-but the "many" have gone off in different directions-causing a considerable mess in quality control in the present generation. So if your lineage book is important to you-I have no problem with that.
If Hendrik does his Yik Kam wing chun-I have no problem with that either.

I have interest in filling out the WCK layers in understanding and practice as well. I had a very basic foundation in Ip Man through Moy Yat lineage / teachings before we all transitioned over to HFY. With the lineage stuff I don't think that book is representative - it was a slice in time. But I'll leave it to my sifu to talk about what future projects may or may not be going on.

BTW I don't wear my academic hat here and never have-though it is mentioned at times by others. I am just a person climbing one wng chun mountain-there are others- but the view is great.

I agree with you on all that and am on a path myself, and don't bring my academics in either.

There are supposedly wing chun people now who are into mma-ok with me if that helps them.
I did mma before wc when it was not called mma-but I find understanding wing chun approach to timing, distance, balance, speed, power, combinations, lines, angles, strategy and tactics
enough to keep me busy.Joy Chaudhuri))

For me the mma stuff is more process of elimination - not starting a school and no interest in mediocre ebmas local, so train with better fighters wherever I can find them. Lately they are MT striking and wrestling / bjj ground. But the wc structure, facing, energy holds true so I guess I still have a little of the wc identity. To each their own mountain.

[CFT]

I think all that Joy is saying is that even a published book may not have gone through rigorous academic review. So having an ISBN is no guarantee of veracity.

How much of "Complete Wing Chun" or "Mastering Kung Fu" is actually historically verifiable? Not much I would contend. Beyond a general proof read and removal of libelous comments there probably was no due diligence to track down every assertion to see if it could actually be verified.

[Vajramusti]

I think all that Joy is saying is that even a published book may not have gone through rigorous academic review. So having an ISBN is no guarantee of veracity.

How much of "Complete Wing Chun" or "Mastering Kung Fu" is actually historically verifiable? Not much I would contend. Beyond a general proof read and removal of libelous comments there probably was no due diligence to track down every assertion to see if it could actually be verified.

--------------------------------------------------

CFT is correct.

joy chaudhuri

[Wayfaring]

I think all that Joy is saying is that even a published book may not have gone through rigorous academic review. So having an ISBN is no guarantee of veracity.

How much of "Complete Wing Chun" or "Mastering Kung Fu" is actually historically verifiable? Not much I would contend. Beyond a general proof read and removal of libelous comments there probably was no due diligence to track down every assertion to see if it could actually be verified.

And I'm saying the standard practice in the publishing world is to have copy editors who do general proof reads and clean up statements and content editors who sign off on content accuracy.

Now the degree of content checking may vary, but the fact that it happens is not in dispute - it's standard practice. And that fact alone makes published sources more reliable than statements on online forums.

[CFT]

So what would content editors use as references to check against Wing Chun history?

Right, nothing! QED.

[Wayfaring]

So what would content editors use as references to check against Wing Chun history?

Right, nothing! QED.

Other published works usually is what they do if there is no definitive source. There is not a great deal available as you point out. One book on the opera has a section on red boats, which mentions Cheung Ng. There are scarce other sources. Then it gets down to family artifacts, interviews, etc. The material is scarce. Yet we have whole history books written on ancient Indian societies such as the Anasazi constructed completely from pottery artifacts, dwellings, remains. Which is even less.

Look, Hendrik may have some legitimately formed opinions based upon research. But the way to act upon that is to go through the exercise of writing it out completely in a logical sense minus all the drama and song lyrics and going through the exercise of publishing something.

Or I guess the other option is like we see in this thread. Ad hominem attack the credentials of anyone questioning his conclusions, including published works. Make dubious claims and connections, then refer to them as "fact" and "evidence".

That's my only issue with the whole topic. There is plenty of space for multiple viewpoints on ancestry and lineage in WCK. The healthy approach is to take all with a grain of salt and realize that legend and oral tradition makes for good stories and who knows actually what % is real. Try and get the most out of what you are studying and cool it on the delusional viewpoints.