HFY History

[hskwarrior]

...............................

[Wayfaring]

BPWT,

Thanks for the writeup on your LT kiu sau methods and terminology. I'm getting a little better picture of how it's trained. I will say I have not heard the same terms as an umbrella over chi sau that includes kiu sau and chi kiu in other lineages terminology. Here's another case where the terms sound a little similar to HFY terms, but the meaning is different.

How do we train kiu sau? There are several distinctive HFY kiu sau movements in the first form SNT. These are isolated from the form, and we do drills and challenge tests to ensure the movement contains the right structure and energy for that movement. This training involves things like intercepting a blind side attack, sweeping and controlling space, and other specific training items tied directly to the different kiu sau movements in SNT. This method of training is training by drills, or what we refer to as "saan sau" training or also "Siu Lim Tau" training. To me kiu sau training taught me structure in movement, control of space. It is more blunt of an instrument than chi sau or chi kiu but it involves a strong jong structure that if you are solid on it protects you from getting hit.

[zuti car]

Zuti,

The document I present is by Zhou chien Chuan, the gate keeper of emei 12 zhuang. He wrote the book i took photo to decode the ancient emei 12 zhuang kuit in 1950s. This is a very famous classical book in the Chinese internal training in 1950 era.

The original documents of emei 12 zhuang is now kept in Beijing museum china.
You can go there to do carbon test if you like.



In fact there are many wcners already begin to resale and study the emei 12 zhuang in ASia and USA.
It is only a matter of time, as close as next few months, the emei 12 zhuang Practitioners will perform the section of 1848 ykslt to compare with how ykslt is practiced today.





Attached is the cover of the book by Zhou which I qoute above.

The orginal documents of emei 12 zhuang is kept in Beijing museum


http://www.emeiqigong.us/lineage/lineage/bai-yun.html

Now we are getting somewhere . So , the book is from 1950's , not from 1840's . About the "original" document of Emei snake or whatever , have you seen it , what is the content of that document , is it possible to find a copy that document in some historical studies ? If yes , please be so kind and give the titles of thous books so I can check the content. About original document , how old is that document , is it written on paper or some other material . Anyway , I will check if such a document is listed in that Beijing museum catalog . Now , go back to that gate keeper . I do not know what kind of book he wrote , is that historical book or some other kind but we have to be aware of some facts here. Being published in the 1950's in China during the ban of martial arts means that the author was very well connected with communists regime , probably had high rank in communist party ( I have some experience living in communist country so I know very well how the things are working).No matter what , the content of the book , not only that one , but every book published at that time should on the first place to fit agenda of the communist regime , after that , there is some room for real facts . My point is , if you publish a book in China in times when you can loose your head even if someone suspect that you are thinking wrongly , about the stuff banned by the government , well ,that is saying enough about the author and the content of the book . At the same time Yip Man wrote "history" of his Wing Chun in Hong Kong , we know today that he actually invented that story to give some "face" and prestige to his style , and that is a common practice among the kung fu practitioners . We have to be aware of some other thing , it is a common practice that people give credit for changes in style curriculum to famous ancestors in order to give them credibility , remember Yip Man , Leung Bik story . Anyway , until I check that document from Beijing museum I cannot tell more. What I can tell is that complete history of kung fu styles today was invented in republican period , the golden age of kung fu pracitce and kung fu books in particular. A lot of "facts" today are nothing more than pulp fiction stories published at that time .For example, Shaolin and Bodhidharma was invented between 1904 and 1915 . For the first time story about Bodhidharma and Shaolin was published in the popular novel "Travels of Lao Can" in 1904 . Second book that popularized Shaolin -Bodhidharma myth was "Secrets of Shaolin Boxing" published in 1915 . There is no indication, not even one evidence that this story existed before this time and there are a lot of written and material evidence about Shaolin .
Hendrik , please , do not misunderstand me , I don't have anything against you , but your evidence are not really that . Your method of research is far from serious scientific research and you base your claims on unverified , carefully selected sources that fit your point of view . You can believe i whatever you want , but you , just like HFY guys , TWC guys and all other , do not have the right to present your believes as facts . I know you will not agree with me , you and all others , but that does not change the fact that there is not even one real evidence to support any of the "wing chun creation stories" . I mean , there is much more historical evidence to prove King Arthur's existence than evidence for any of the Wing Chun ancestors , my question is , if you don't believe in King Arthur , how can you believe in Hung Gan Biu , Leung Yee Tai and others .

[Wayfaring]

Now we are getting somewhere . So , the book is from 1950's , not from 1840's . About the "original" document of Emei snake or whatever , have you seen it , what is the content of that document , is it possible to find a copy that document in some historical studies ? If yes , please be so kind and give the titles of thous books so I can check the content. About original document , how old is that document , is it written on paper or some other material . Anyway , I will check if such a document is listed in that Beijing museum catalog . Now , go back to that gate keeper . I do not know what kind of book he wrote , is that historical book or some other kind but we have to be aware of some facts here. Being published in the 1950's in China during the ban of martial arts means that the author was very well connected with communists regime , probably had high rank in communist party ( I have some experience living in communist country so I know very well how the things are working).No matter what , the content of the book , not only that one , but every book published at that time should on the first place to fit agenda of the communist regime , after that , there is some room for real facts . My point is , if you publish a book in China in times when you can loose your head even if someone suspect that you are thinking wrongly , about the stuff banned by the government , well ,that is saying enough about the author and the content of the book . At the same time Yip Man wrote "history" of his Wing Chun in Hong Kong , we know today that he actually invented that story to give some "face" and prestige to his style , and that is a common practice among the kung fu practitioners . We have to be aware of some other thing , it is a common practice that people give credit for changes in style curriculum to famous ancestors in order to give them credibility , remember Yip Man , Leung Bik story . Anyway , until I check that document from Beijing museum I cannot tell more. What I can tell is that complete history of kung fu styles today was invented in republican period , the golden age of kung fu pracitce and kung fu books in particular. A lot of "facts" today are nothing more than pulp fiction stories published at that time .For example, Shaolin and Bodhidharma was invented between 1904 and 1915 . For the first time story about Bodhidharma and Shaolin was published in the popular novel "Travels of Lao Can" in 1904 . Second book that popularized Shaolin -Bodhidharma myth was "Secrets of Shaolin Boxing" published in 1915 . There is no indication, not even one evidence that this story existed before this time and there are a lot of written and material evidence about Shaolin .
Hendrik , please , do not misunderstand me , I don't have anything against you , but your evidence are not really that . Your method of research is far from serious scientific research and you base your claims on unverified , carefully selected sources that fit your point of view . You can believe i whatever you want , but you , just like HFY guys , TWC guys and all other , do not have the right to present your believes as facts . I know you will not agree with me , you and all others , but that does not change the fact that there is not even one real evidence to support any of the "wing chun creation stories" . I mean , there is much more historical evidence to prove King Arthur's existence than evidence for any of the Wing Chun ancestors , my question is , if you don't believe in King Arthur , how can you believe in Hung Gan Biu , Leung Yee Tai and others .

zuti makes good points. All stories I'm aware of are oral tradition plus artifacts. Trying to "prove" these as fact is pretty difficult.

[Hendrik]

1.

This is the document you can check

The Emei Treasured Lotus Canon. This book is currently held in a Beijing museum.

http://www.emeiqigong.us/lineage/lineage/bai-yun.html


2.

This is the gate keeper Zhou, a very well known expert in china at his era.
http://www.emeiqigong.us/lineage/lin...ian-chuan.html


Zhou the gate keeper was put in Jail by the communist even before the culture revolution.
Read the following if you read Chinese

周潜川在“文革”前就陷入冤狱，倍遭迫害，是河北保定市委书记王觉民冤案的同案受害者，1971年逝于狱中 。党的十一届三中全会以后，才得彻底平反。卫生部中医局局长吕炳奎在1985年曾说：周潜川是我国气功的一 代代表人物，他的冤狱不能不说是我国气功发展史中的－个损失。

Zhou bio , and publication of Zhou is listed here and the above book i post the cover is in the list

http://baike.baidu.com/view/1230368.htm





3.

Gm Fu the current gate keeper


Attached is the Gm Fu with Jim Rosalendo a few years ago.
I have heard , Gm Fu will run a seminal on emei art soon in the USA for wcners.


Many wcners from different lineages are doing research currently on emei connection both in Asia and USA ,
and have confirmed the 1848 version of YKSLT indeed is a off spring of emei art because there are tcma DNA signatures the emei practioners recognized. And be able to increase the performance of the 1848 version YKSLT many time once the emei practice is followed.



4. Tcma DNA doesn't lie. That simple , what is likely or not likely can be spot.
I present related and matching facts from unrelated multiple sources in Chinese history .

You sure can have your own view.



Finally,
can you proof you are your great great grandfather( who live in 1800) decendent?
And proof your great great grand father really exist?
May be you can show your great great grandfather birth certificate and even better get a carbon test?

Please don't get me wrong. I have nothing against you.
I just like to see how you can do it scientifically.

Now we are getting somewhere . So , the book is from 1950's , not from 1840's . About the "original" document of Emei snake or whatever , have you seen it , what is the content of that document , is it possible to find a copy that document in some historical studies ? If yes , please be so kind and give the titles of thous books so I can check the content. About original document , how old is that document , is it written on paper or some other material . Anyway , I will check if such a document is listed in that Beijing museum catalog . Now , go back to that gate keeper . I do not know what kind of book he wrote , is that historical book or some other kind but we have to be aware of some facts here. Being published in the 1950's in China during the ban of martial arts means that the author was very well connected with communists regime , probably had high rank in communist party ( I have some experience living in communist country so I know very well how the things are working).No matter what , the content of the book , not only that one , but every book published at that time should on the first place to fit agenda of the communist regime , after that , there is some room for real facts .


My point is , if you publish a book in China in times when you can loose your head even if someone suspect that you are thinking wrongly , about the stuff banned by the government , well ,that is saying enough about the author and the content of the book .




At the same time Yip Man wrote "history" of his Wing Chun in Hong Kong , we know today that he actually invented that story to give some "face" and prestige to his style , and that is a common practice among the kung fu practitioners . We have to be aware of some other thing , it is a common practice that people give credit for changes in style curriculum to famous ancestors in order to give them credibility , remember Yip Man , Leung Bik story . Anyway , until I check that document from Beijing museum I cannot tell more. What I can tell is that complete history of kung fu styles today was invented in republican period , the golden age of kung fu pracitce and kung fu books in particular. A lot of "facts" today are nothing more than pulp fiction stories published at that time .For example, Shaolin and Bodhidharma was invented between 1904 and 1915 . For the first time story about Bodhidharma and Shaolin was published in the popular novel "Travels of Lao Can" in 1904 . Second book that popularized Shaolin -Bodhidharma myth was "Secrets of Shaolin Boxing" published in 1915 . There is no indication, not even one evidence that this story existed before this time and there are a lot of written and material evidence about Shaolin .


Hendrik , please , do not misunderstand me , I don't have anything against you , but your evidence are not really that . Your method of research is far from serious scientific research and you base your claims on unverified , carefully selected sources that fit your point of view . You can believe i whatever you want , but you , just like HFY guys , TWC guys and all other , do not have the right to present your believes as facts . I know you will not agree with me , you and all others , but that does not change the fact that there is not even one real evidence to support any of the "wing chun creation stories" . I mean , there is much more historical evidence to prove King Arthur's existence than evidence for any of the Wing Chun ancestors , my question is , if you don't believe in King Arthur , how can you believe in Hung Gan Biu , Leung Yee Tai and others .

[JPinAZ]

Hendrik, since you already have many threads you can share this information, please take your discussion there as this really doesn't have much to do with Hung Fa Yi history.

[Hendrik]

Hendrik, since you already have many threads you can share this information, please take your discussion there as this really doesn't have much to do with Hung Fa Yi history.

I have no interest in HFY history.
but I will clarify any un true stories made and present on yik kam and emei .

[zuti car]

1.

This is the document you can check

The Emei Treasured Lotus Canon. This book is currently held in a Beijing museum.

http://www.emeiqigong.us/lineage/lineage/bai-yun.html


2.

This is the gate keeper Zhou, a very well known expert in china at his era.
http://www.emeiqigong.us/lineage/lin...ian-chuan.html


Zhou the gate keeper was put in Jail by the communist even before the culture revolution.
Read the following if you read Chinese

周潜川在“文革”前就陷入冤狱，倍遭迫害，是河北保定市委书记王觉民冤案的同案受害者，1971年逝于狱中 。党的十一届三中全会以后，才得彻底平反。卫生部中医局局长吕炳奎在1985年曾说：周潜川是我国气功的一 代代表人物，他的冤狱不能不说是我国气功发展史中的－个损失。

Zhou bio , and publication of Zhou is listed here and the above book i post the cover is in the list

http://baike.baidu.com/view/1230368.htm





3.

You can contact the present gate keeper Gm Fu to get the information you like
http://www.emeiqigong.us/lineage/lin...wei-zhong.html.


Attached is the Gm Fu with Jim Rosalendo a few years ago.
I have heard , Gm Fu will run a seminal on emei art soon in the USA for wcners.


Many wcners from different lineages are doing research currently on emei connection in Asia and USA ,
and have confirmed the YKSLT indeed is a off spring of emei art because there are tcma DNA signatures the emei practioners recognized.



4. Tcma DNA doesn't lie. That simple , what is likely or not likely can be spot.
I present related and matching facts from unrelated multiple sources in Chinese history .

You sure can have your own view.



Finally,
can you proof you are your great great grandfather( who live in 1800) decendent?
And proof your great great grand father really exist?
May be you can show your great great grandfather birth certificate and even better get a carbon test?

Please don't get me wrong. I have nothing against you.
I just like to see how you can do it scientifically.

Are you serious ? Really ? This is your source of information ? Man, this more funny than Marvel's comic book . Ok , here I see a web site where people are trying to sell their product . Story about that founder from 13th Century is just that , a story similar to Chang San Feng story , Yue Fei ect . There is no sources of information, no referent institution , literature ,researcher's name, nothing , just a story .And he united no less 3600 school of thoughts , really? No less than 3600? How many philosophical schools existed in China altogether during the whole history of China? It would be good to use some common sense from time to time. About a book , can you give me the location of that museum because it is totally unclear which museum they is in the possession of the book , they only say :" This book is currently held in a Beijing museum." So which one , I can write and ask does the museum posses such a book . This is a classical bull**** which can be found on 99% kung fu sites , some legends presented as a history in order to prove originality and superiority of particular style /system . This is a site for believers , not place where someone would search historical data . About my ancestors , you chose a wrong guy for that . I can prove my lineage form my father's side 600 years in thee past and form my mother's side form 1180, ad. Now , to show you how you search for evidence , all research about my family ( and only my family but all the families in my country ) are conducted by Ethnological Museum in Belgrade , there , you can find all the documents ( like birth certificates preserved by Serbian Orthodox Church , tax payers list , documented grave sites as direct and most important sources of data) . It is very easy to go there , and check ( of course you would need a translator unless you speak french , because a lot of these researches are published on French language) . You can find names of research team , the most important was.Dr. Milisav Lutovac(1901–1988) ,professor of Anthropogeography and ethnology who earned his academic titles on Sorbonne University in Paris . About my great grand father , he was born 1867 , he was an officer in Serbian army during the end of 19th Century , killed by Turks in 1911 ,beside his official documents and army archive his grave site is still in his home town and if you are interested you can go to check , I will give you the location , or you want to exhume his body to do a DNA check? So , as you can see it is easy to prove that someone or something existed in 1800s or even before , if he or it really existed , especially in country like Chine where you can find a tons of written documents about everything . I will not return to this mater again , nor I will argue with you again. I hope you can realize where you are wrong , but if you do not , that is also ok . Anyway I will continue to separate actual facts from believes .

[BPWT..]

BPWT,

Thanks for the writeup on your LT kiu sau methods and terminology. I'm getting a little better picture of how it's trained. I will say I have not heard the same terms as an umbrella over chi sau that includes kiu sau and chi kiu in other lineages terminology. Here's another case where the terms sound a little similar to HFY terms, but the meaning is different.

How do we train kiu sau? There are several distinctive HFY kiu sau movements in the first form SNT. These are isolated from the form, and we do drills and challenge tests to ensure the movement contains the right structure and energy for that movement. This training involves things like intercepting a blind side attack, sweeping and controlling space, and other specific training items tied directly to the different kiu sau movements in SNT. This method of training is training by drills, or what we refer to as "saan sau" training or also "Siu Lim Tau" training. To me kiu sau training taught me structure in movement, control of space. It is more blunt of an instrument than chi sau or chi kiu but it involves a strong jong structure that if you are solid on it protects you from getting hit.

You're welcome. I think it is possible that the drills you train for Kiu Sau methods have a similar goal to ours, only in my line we train them in our Chi Sau sections and then in Lat Sau training. So using your definitions, I would say that our Chi Sau sections/Lat Sau work is also about training structure in movement and controlling space.

But for sure, it sounds as though HFY has a more clearly laid out approach. I have met people from our line who approach the LTWT Chi Sau sections very differently to how I've been shown to approach them. We might be doing pretty much the same sections, but have a different idea of why we're doing them . Perhaps Leung Ting, in trying to create a teaching platform that would make things clear, somehow made things... murkier.

[Hendrik]

Attached is the grand student of Yik kam, a senior in lineage who my late sifu study with in mid 1900.

Yik kam exist , yik kam teaching exist can be verify from his different off spring lineages which exist today, yik kam link to 1848 heaven and earth association uprising exist, re boat uprising exist in Chinese history, yik kam SLT link to Emei exist, emei exist in Chinese history , tcma , amd buddhism. Emei tcma DNA exist .
From multiple independent sources the above exist , match, and verify each other's .



Seriously , using the so called political correct term,
even under microscope, by facts, yik kam and his Wck and Wck connection is very likely exist.

As for your great great grandfather, in this stage , it is not sure. You have to do better if you want to proof your great great grand father is a facts not a believe. Where is your carbon test of his birth certificate and scientific proven DNA as you expect from others?

Since you want to be a critic, I expect you to be atleast parr in your evidence. Walk your talk. Instead of using the making other wrong tactic to gain control but really an empty shelf within.

Isn't it always easy to critic and deny others facts with clever words but can not present what one demand on others?





I sign off from this thread now. Open a new thread if anyone likes to discuss with facts.







Btw, just please do not give me this

So , as you can see it is easy to prove that someone or something existed in 1800s or even before , if he or it really existed , especially in country like Chine where you can find a tons of written documents about everything .*


At one point you talk about how difficult it is to published a book in china like a pro,

now using the above reason trying to proof your great great grandfather exist.

Which is doesn't make much sense at all, any real Chinese historian researchers know, massive destruction happen to Chinese ancients documents and even grave in the culture resolution era.


In fact the emei 12 zhuang documents has to be send out to hide for protected against destruction .

Story even says , They have to hide one book written by Zhou ( a book which is decode the ancient pressure points strike document which Zhou ) in a sleeping pillow or something . And only after decades they have luckily protect it , they published it.


So, where is the tons of written documents which you use as a convernient alibi where real Chinese martial art researchers find not the facts?

About my great grand father , he was born 1867 , he was an officer in Serbian army during the end of 19th Century , killed by Turks in 1911 ,beside his official documents and army archive his grave site is still in his home town and if you are interested you can go to check , I will give you the location , or you want to exhume his body to do a DNA check?

So , as you can see it is easy to prove that someone or something existed in 1800s or even before , if he or it really existed , especially in country like Chine where you can find a tons of written documents about everything .

I will not return to this mater again , nor I will argue with you again. I hope you can realize where you are wrong , but if you do not , that is also ok . Anyway I will continue to separate actual facts from believes .

[JPinAZ]

You're welcome. I think it is possible that the drills you train for Kiu Sau methods have a similar goal to ours, only in my line we train them in our Chi Sau sections and then in Lat Sau training. So using your definitions, I would say that our Chi Sau sections/Lat Sau work is also about training structure in movement and controlling space.

Hi there. I agree that ALL chi sau focuses on training structure in movement and controlling space. While I only have a minute, I just wanted to clarify one distinction in case there was any confusion - HFY's Kiu Sau methods are not terms to describe what is going on in Taan/Bong/Fook chi sau. What I mean is, our kiu sau is not a method for describing terms for the actions that occur withing T/B/F chi sau, as some other arts that have kiu sau broken into action like spit/swallow, wink rise, etc as I've seen in say, Chi Sim. HFY's bridging applications of Kiu Sau and T/B/F chi sau are 2 separate platforms in our overall Chi Sau 'umbrella'. While they both do deal with a 'bridge', they are two very different applications of 'chi sau' bridging for 2 distinct timeframes with very little overlap, if any.

For example, commonly seen tan/bong/fook chi sau works from either a single hand engagement (dan chi) or 2 hands engaged (what you may call lok sau/lat sau?) - but they both work from squared-up, 'inside-the-shoulders' connected position (inside the box). HFY's Kiu Sau training on the other hand, typically starts from a no contact position focusing on single arm engagement outside-the-box working to the edge of the box and sometimes getting into 2 arm contact. But they are 2 different focuses on mechanics, contact points, leverage, position and range, not to mention the separate Heaven/Human/Earth concepts and strategies/tactics that apply to one or the other (sure, some of these concepts do overlap).
As has been pointed out earlier, without direct sharing in person, words only go so far, but hopefully this helps in drawing a distinction between HFY's T/B/F Chi Sau and HFY's Kiu Sau!

[KPM]

HFY's Kiu Sau training on the other hand, typically starts from a no contact position focusing on single arm engagement outside-the-box working to the edge of the box and sometimes getting into 2 arm contact.

I'm sure they are different, but I'll point out that this sounds a bit like TWC's "cross arm Chi Sao."

[zuti car]

I'm sure they are different, but I'll point out that this sounds a bit like TWC's "cross arm Chi Sao."

My thought exactly

[JPinAZ]

I'm sure they are different, but I'll point out that this sounds a bit like TWC's "cross arm Chi Sao."

You're right, they are different
Unless someone is extremely biased and/or has a set agenda (not say this applies to you), I don't see how that's possible given the vast differences in concepts, theory, principles, strategies, applications, etc that even the written word shows us that they are not alike. And the fact there are no HFY application videos for those without experience to compare things to to make a comparison regarding any similarity the might see.
From my POV of training HFY since 2002, listening to everything shared by TWC people over the years, as well my direct experiences training along side a TWC Sifu that now studies and teaches HFY, I confidently say that I know that HFY Kiu Sau and TWC "Cross arm Chi Sao" are 2 very different things operating under completely different ideas & understanding of strategies, tactics, concepts & principles.

As has been pointed out several times already, there are many others that have also had the experiences I've had, and even after only a few hours, they all come away knowing the same thing I and others are saying.
LOL, heck, don't take my word for it:

I've been training in TWC since 1989, and had the pleasure of meeting and comparing styles (briefly) with HFY student duende from this forum some years ago.

There are some similarities between the two systems, but the differences way outnumber them. If you are a TWC guy and think differently I suggest you reserve judgement until you actually meet an HFY practitioner, because you are unlikely to know what you are on about.

And this is only after briefly comparing both for only a few hours! While everyone is surely entitled to their view, and no offence intended, 'anerlich's input carries a lot more weight vs. what others think they 'see' without real experience in both systems

[KPM]

Unless someone is extremely biased and/or has a set agenda (not say this applies to you ), I don't see how that's possible

Don't get me wrong JP! I have no idea what the Kiu Sau you wrote about looks like or how it works. That's why I said I as pretty sure they were different. I was only commenting that the description of being one arm to one arm and starting on the outside sounded a bit like cross arm Chi Sao. That's all. No nefarious plots intended!