Yep but most of the wing chun world thinks that the "bridge" means the arm and chum kiu means to look for it.
It's the same rubbish as when they translate siu lim tau to mean the small idea and yet they fill the whole form up with fighting applications. What's small about that? It should be called "full lim tau" lol
What I am trying to convey is that to use figurative/analogy based descriptions is limited. Of course you argue all day long about how this works or doesn't work in reference to an actual/real bridge we would walk across. It is faulty logic. An analogy is used to give a basic mental picture.
In many MAs, and in various WC lineages, bridging is clearly used to describe making contact, usually with the limbs. If you understood better what Kiu was, it would make more sense. Like I said, this word is used in other Chinese arts too - and not to mean the attacking line.
Look, it is a given that in WC/VT/WT the aim is to strike the opponent. In SNT there are many things to learn, but if we look at recycling the arms, elbow position, facing, etc, we can see them all pointing to the importance of striking the opponent and being in a position to do this.
But in Chum Kiu, the form is about bridging (connecting) and, naturally, what will come from that - which of course is striking. Given that we all know the aim is to strike your opponent (even a complete novice will understand this before they even start their first lesson in the art), this form focuses on the bridge work/connections - because they will inevitably happen.
Why do you think there is so much bong in Chum Kiu? You say that you don't seek a bridge in a fight, you seek to hit. Sure. But like I said, can you actually fight like this? Do you never intercept or have your strikes intercepted? Of course not.
I don't subscribe to the idea that the Biu Tze form is only about emergency techniques/ideas, though there are certainly some in there. If I use your logic, why would that be so. You don't want to find yourself out of position, so why train from it? Because it can happen, so you prepare for it.
Chum Kiu is the same - you will connect/bridge in a fight, even though you'd like to just continually and cleanly strike someone - sadly, this isn't how things actually happen. Hence what is inside the CK form.
The reason I referenced Kevin's video with the Yat Fook Yee moment is to highlight the point that this (Yat Fook Yee) is a bridging concept. A connecting concept. Like I said, PB pinned the arms and punched into the open gap. The punch was the strike, the Yat Fook Yee was the bridge.
Again, I know you will say this is not so. Okay. So we disagree. But if you think about the word Kiu and what it means in relation to the arm, then you will see why the second form is called Chum Kiu, and not Chum Da.
No mocking, tongue-in-cheek signature here... move on.
The meaning of the term 'karma' in Hinduism or Jainism is different and irrelevant to its meaning in Buddhism.
When someone punches at you do you seek to connect with their arms?Chum Kiu is the same - you will connect/bridge in a fight, even though you'd like to just continually and cleanly strike someone - sadly, this isn't how things actually happen. Hence what is inside the CK form.
Great But the term Kiu, across different Chinese MA systems has some common traits. The common trait is in reference to the arm.
Are you reading what I am writing? Read my previous post. You are asking questions I have already answered (many times, in fact).
Tell me, why is Chum Kiu not called Chum Da?
Then tell me why other southern systems use the term Kiu in relation to the arm.
No mocking, tongue-in-cheek signature here... move on.
Listen dude, I don't take the literal westernized translations as anything.
Siu Lim Tau means small or young idea but many people fill the form up with rubbish so the translation means nothing. Kiu does mean bridge but bridge can have many translations. Some other Kung Fu systems use the term bridge to mean the forearm but Ving Tsun does not. Muk Yan Jong means wooden steak in the ground but most people think it means wooden dummy or man. Bil Jee can be translated as pointing or shooting fingers so people thing it is to do with finger jabs and some think it means to push chi to the finger tips. The form has nothing to do with this so Bil Jee can mean many things. Chi Sau can be translated as sticky arms but the drill has nothing to do with sticking.
Stop hanging on words! You are wrong.
BTW you are making an idiot of yourself by putting my translation in your profile. To you it may come across as a pizz take but in fact it is the correct translation for Chum Kiu. Yours is Leung Ting nonsense.
Great.
You keep talking about when someone inevitably contacts your arm when you punch. I'm asking the opposite. Is that what you seek to do when someone punches at you? You seek to build your physical 'bridge' through arm contact?Are you reading what I am writing? Read my previous post. You are asking questions I have already answered (many times, in fact).
Because 'seeking the strike' is asking to get hit.Tell me, why is Chum Kiu not called Chum Da?
I don't care. I don't train other southern systems.Then tell me why other southern systems use the term Kiu in relation to the arm.
Your level of arrogance is simply astounding, Graham. How can you say I am wrong, and hanging on words, when you freely admit that you take the translations 'as anything'?
Backwards logic. If you don't trust in translations and meanings of words, how could you possibly know that a translation is wrong? You invalidate your own words.
How can you know or trust what it means? You just said you don't take the translations as anything.
You mean the translation you don't stand by? How can it be a correct translation when you don't go by them? My translation from Leung Ting is nonsense, you say - so you speak Cantonese better than Leung Ting? Amazing arrogance from you.
Even within your own lineage via WSL there are people (David Peterson) who speak the language and who write about the meanings - and guess what... it doesn't tally with your own.
Yet still, you insist that your translation (which you don't take as anything) is the correct translation.
Hopeless.
No mocking, tongue-in-cheek signature here... move on.
Youve avoided this........
So let me get this right, if during a fight two arms collide, the opponents arm position is totally irrelevant to you guys?
You dont have to take it into account?
It "doesnt exist"???
And please......... before you say sticking.... i havent said sticking once.
Like you avoid those pesky opponents arms...............