I want to know everything i can about Hung Fa Yi Wing chun

[yuanfen]

Lots of silly fussing over tan sau on several sides, it seems to me anyway....about outside/inside or "scientific" and "new"approach to tan sao.
Tan with proper structure and timing can be used inside or outside the other fella's hand position when the line is there.

[passing_through]

wingchunalex,

In reading your comments on this thread, you raised (at least) 7 points to which I responded. I have yet to see a more complete reply than : what are you getting at? all of that is pretty much standard knowlege and common sense. If what I have written in response to you was “standard knowledge and common sense” I trust that in the future you will refrain from making similar, baseless assertions as you did in this thread.

Jeremy R.

[passing_through]

Before making a comparison between Yip Man, Yuen Kay-San/Sum Nung and HFY I want to make a few things clear:

1) "Come and See" - The study of martial arts includes gaining experience using your whole body, your mind and your spirit. The majority of this experience cannot be communicated through the written word. Email and internet discussion forums can only introduce basic ideas. Anything more than basic information requires personal, one-to-one interaction. After having a shared experience, email and forums are beneficial to discuss the shared experience. If you fail to accept this as an axiom, there is no basis for communication. I state that email and forums are limited and ultimately not reality - and that to completely understand something you must experience it. If you refuse to accept this, there is nothing to discuss. If you do accept this, I can only discuss to a certain point before your question has to be addressed in person.

2) HFY as "best" system - This depends on what you are using to define as the reason for studying martial arts. For the purpose of this discussion, I am defining the reason for study as of human, hand-to-hand combat. With that in mind, "best" is not a personal judgment based on personal criteria. When dealing with combat there are two aspects: the combat system and the person operating it. In W.W.II, it took 4 to 5 Sherman Tanks to stop one German Tiger Tank. If the crewmen of both sets of tanks were equally skilled the advantage was due to combat system. This is an example of a superior combat system. On the other hand, a combat veteran with a handgun can often kill a novice with an AK-47. This is the benefit of experience. A combat system must be based on science while the human factor must be based on experience. In hand-to-hand combat, there are superior systems and inferior systems. I submit that HFY is a system based on objective fact and not personal opinion and belongs to the "superior" system category. I make no statements about other lineages or families - I feel that is up to members of those families to make their own assertions or deny the validity of mine with clear reasoning.

3) System vs. style - For the purposes of this discussion, I define "style" as an artist's characteristic manner of expression and a "system" as an established orderly way of doing something, based on principles. A combat system, such as HFY, should be based on what is real and true rather than one's experience and opinions. HFY is based upon truth, a body of principles and facts. The expression of these principles and facts is an individual style. This is different than teaching a system based on one's personal experience, personality and opinions. However, the expression of this type of training is also an individual style. Do you see where problems can arise when a system is based on personal opinion rather than facts and science? That says nothing about other systems/styles; you may very well study a system based on facts but you have to make that assertion and support it, not me. Nor should you conclude that I am stating that if you study anything other than HFY you're a doo-doo head, stupid, vacuous, ignorant, or any thing in that vein. If you feel that your lineage/family/approach/whatever is also based on what is real and true, lay out support for your position.

4) From what information that has been gathered to date by the VTM, it is the conclusion of the VTM, as an organization, that HFY is the original style of Wing Chun from which all lineages that contain the three forms of Siu Nim Tau, Chum Kiu, and Biu Ji as their core originated. It is a comprehensive system that contains certain ideas, concepts, principles, techniques and methods that are unique and original to HFY. I'm not saying that if you learn HFY you're going to be able to beat your opponent 100% of the time. As I stated above, there is the human factor to consider. Alson, I am not making a value judgement on other systems; to state that HFY is the original form takes away nothing from other lineages and families. If you feel the need to infer that I am stating HFY is superior, I cannot stop you. However, I tell you now that you are the one making this assertion, not me.

A book is in the works by the VTM to present the evidence and conclusions in regards to Wing Chun history. It should be on the market early-to-middle next year.

===================

Now for a general comparison between HFY and Yip Man and Yeun Kay-San. I have actual experience in Yip Man and Hung Fa Yi. I have very limited experience in Yuen Kay-San/Sum Nung - primarily intellectual understanding. I'm awaiting the next YKS/SN workshop or Friendship Seminar for more information.

Philosophy
HFY - based on Chan Buddhism
YM - based on individual teachers
YKS - based on individual teachers

Heath training
HFY - Heigung (qigung): Siu Nim Tau form, Heaven, Man, and Earth postures, Iron Body, Iron Palm, and Faat Ging (Fa Jing) exercises, together with herbal knowledge. Without a foundation in SNT heigung, Biu Ji will never be fully expressed.
YM - Siu Nim Tau form, general introduction to heigung - anything more that is taught has been introduced by individual teachers from outside Yip Man's teachings. Most well-known disciples do not address the issue of heigung, focusing instead on fighting capability. Heigung information most often comes from sources outside Wing Chun
YKS - Kidney Washing, introduced from a source outside Wing Chun

Combat strategy/tactics
HFY - Five Methods of combat, all ranges from kicking to striking to locking to throwing/grabbing
YM - based on individual teachers, tend to avoid ground and long kicking
YKS - based on individual teachers

Science
HFY - dimensional awareness
YM - directional awareness
YKS - directional awareness

Chi Sau Methodology
HFY - Kiu Sau, Chi Sau (single, double, cross), Saan Sau
YM - Chi Sau (single, double - very few even attempt cross hand)
YKS - Chi Sau (single, double) and Saan Sau

Ultimately, YM and YKS training is based on individual teachers, changing with each generation. HFY is based on consistent reference points and utilizes checks and balances throughout the system. Again, this is not a value judgement. If you are happy and enjoy the system you train, I am happy for you. If you are curious about HFY, I'll welcome your questions. I am not trying to "win" anyone over. I share what I know and leave it up to you to decide matters for yourself.

[passing_through]

Brian,

I'll have something for you tomorrow at lunchtime. I don't have much time to finish things today. I haven't forgotten.

Here's something really quick:

when you said "you always have to keep an open mind"--in referance to studying the continentals.....if you have already decided that the continentals cannot answer all your questions than your mind is not open, your mind is made up. we must be multi dimensional in our thinking,imo ..... perhaps the problem is that the student, in this situation, simply didnt understand the answers that the continentals gave.

I partially agree and partially disagree with your statements. This is not an issue of open-mindedness. If, through rational and logical investigation, I realize that the Continentals (or any other systems of thought) attempt to force a conclusion along the lines of 2+2=3, I must reject this system of thought. An open mind does not change logical fallacies and incorrect conclusions. However, while the Continenetals may not by completely true, I cannot discount valid conclusions even if only one part of the overall system of thought is erroneous. Additionally, and this is speaking for me personally, as I learn new information I compare it to old information to see if I came to the wrong conclusion in my investigation.

An open mind is one that allows us to think critically about what we have been taught and what we have experienced. A closed mind does not allow for critical thought. A closed mind might realize that a system of thought is proposing 2+2=3 and continues to argue for the validity of the system of thought regardless of this realization.

Jeremy R.

[byond]

hi jeremy---what are you trying to do to me?? i dont know what to talk about first..lol...aaaaaaaarrrrrrr
o.k..on the continental example...... i see your point ....but if "through rationale and logical investigation"-----this depends on individual ability to use logical deduction---if someones logic is flawed, than they are not understanding the answer the continentals(as per our example) gave---i believe we have to be carefull so we dont miss something do to our ignorance-----i agree if one who is skilled in logical reasoning, determins that a particular paradigm is forcing an inncorrect conclusion,,,,they need to reject that particular paradigm....i personaly agree and always cross referance all my conclusions with all new data, imo as would anyone in search of the truth...and yes critical thinking is a must(imo)

anerlich--- oh no ...time to start from scratch for red5angel

[byond]

hi jeremy...this is a responce to your comparison post

1) "come and see"---i agree

2) hfy as "best" system---i dont have enough information nor experience to agree or disagree---when you say "i submit that hfy is a system based on objective fact and not personal opinion---lol....to me that statement is opinion...can you elaborate on your reasoning

3) i agree---but...doo doo head?


4) historicaly i disagree---from the information i have gathered, it is my conclusion that yks and koolo village are the most original in flavor..... old style wing chun from wong wah bo traditionaly used small frame ygkym as seen in fok bo chun student yks as well as leung jans teachings in koolo village...it was passed down by the fung family that wong wah bo was the originator of the wing chun that contains the 3 hand forms......if we compare what fok bo chun taught to what leung jan taught in fatsan we see that there are almost identical except for some of the teachings from fung siu ching that yks learned and added in....though in the yks system they have preserved what came from fok bo chun and what came from fung siu ching.....many things are consistant with what leung jan taught in fatsan to what he taught in koolo village...though there was some modification...the structure for the transmision of knowledge changed....but over all,the common denominator's are"sound " in supporting what red boat performer wong wah bo passed on......
now if we look at things from a differant angle.....examining hfy...that is somewhat harder to do for me...i have limited access to hfy knowledge and experience....but a fast examination of the hfy curiculum,on the vtm web site,causes more questions for me than answers....for example the 2 seperate concepts of siu nim tao and siu lien tao.....from my understanding yip man exclusivly used the term siu "nim" to....no one else uses it...the use of the term bot tzam do is exclusivly a yip man word....im not sure how terms yip man came up with,would have made there way into an original version of the system. as well as the luk sao platform...this was something that was created by yks and yip man....koolo village doesnt have the luk sao platform..they have the circling hands....yip man came up with the dan chi sao concept....so ive never understood how this material is in a system that is supposed to predate the material im refering to.....additionaly hfy has hei gung in the system....red boat performer wong wah bo did not pass on any teachings on hei gung or chi...this can be verified in the yks system since there hei gung form was imported from external sources as well as in koolo village...which leung jan , a doctor, didnt pass on teachings on chi....he obviously didnt believe it was part of the system because he wasnt taught that way...also hei gung is something that takes lots of "time and energy to develope --i didnt think the early wc clan had time to learn like this....... one of the points of wc was shorter training time....
gotta go,lunch time for me , famine is kicking me arse.
brian

[Tom Kagan]

Ultimately, YM and YKS training is based on individual teachers, changing with each generation. HFY is based on consistent reference points and utilizes checks and balances throughout the system. Again, this is not a value judgement.

What scientific experiment do you have to show reproducible proof that the Ving Tsun of Jeung Ngh is identical to what my SiHing is trying to teach you?

Of the Hung Fa Yi method, there seems to be only Mr. Garrett Gee trying to teach publicly in the past decade. His background comes from other martial arts. Benny Meng has been learning it only the past five years. His background is also in other martial arts. My SiHing, in turn, is now trying to teach it to you. If memory serves, your background also comes from other martial arts.

Whether the Hung Fa Yi method will remain constant - not based on "individual teachers, changing with each generation" - can only be proved with a far greater amount of branching of the lineage's tree than seen up until now.

Only time will tell whether you are correct. You haven't yet completed one of your systems you started and gone off and attempted teach others on your own. At this point, all that is evident is your faith and trust in your sifu's (in reality, your new SiGung's) ability to guide you through the Hung Fa Yi method of learning Ving Tsun and your belief that you will, eventually, "have the true system." To me thus far, this appears to parallel not only most other lineages of Ving Tsun, but other types of martial arts as well.

This is not a value judgment, either.

[wingchunalex]

my comment about common sence was directed at the "article" about what a true "student" was. I may have made a mistake and thought you wrote that "article" on the forum. sorry if that was someone else. I wasn't refering to your replies about what I said.

[wingchunalex]

What you said is exactly what I have been getting at with what I said about Meng, HFY, and the VTM. Thank you for writing that and putting it so clearly. You did a much better job than I did.

[wingchunalex]

Thank you for pointing out some things that I neglected. What you pointed out is quite important in my oppinion.

[wingchunalex]

great thinking on the lack of proof that hung fa yi is the original wing chun. And good ideas to back it up. I agree with you all the way.

[Tom Kagan]

Moy Yat didn't mind if you studied OTHER martial arts, but don't slap him in the face by studying wing chun from another sifu.

You purport to know a lot about my sifu. I am, by far, not even close to an authority on Moy Yat. But, based on your posts, why is it that it appears that you have never spent any real time with him? Like many people, Moy Yat had his disagreements with others. But he truly believed there was never anything that could permanently come between him and a student which could not be worked out given enough time and effort by the student. He even had an expression for this: "Always leave the back door unlocked."

I have a SiHing who studied another martial art with a very famous sifu before that other sifu died. My SiHing lives in California and decided he wanted to learn Ving Tsun from my sifu. My sifu took him as a student and did what he could to guide my SiHing from a distance and whenever my SiHing could come to New York or sifu could travel to California. Sifu later discovered one of his own SiHings had emigrated to California and lived near my SiHing. Sifu told my SiHing to study with him instead.

That SiHing's name is Dan Inosanto.

There are countless other SiHings who chose to study with other Ving Tsun sifus. Some were even sent with a letter of introduction to some of sifu's classmates so that SiHing could have a better chance to be accepted as a student. I even have SiHings who have chosen to become students of other SiHings!

Moy Yat was not "slapped in the face" by these SiHings choices. Of course, by the same token, he did not give his blessing, either. Study with him; study with someone else; it really was up to the student. I'll say it again: this one decision made no difference in your relationship to Moy Yat. What he cared about was how you treated him and what he observed in the way you treated others.

[Rolling_Hand]

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moy Yat didn't mind if you studied OTHER martial arts, but don't slap him in the face by studying wing chun from another sifu.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If anyone can turn on Benny Meng's hair, it's Moy Yat himself, not Sunkeun or Alex. You act impressed with your lips, but you might need to wash your mouth once awhile. With all these jives about what Sunkeun said, what Alex said... the good news is that you still have time to get a haircut and come back to entertain us with your new hair-do.

[sunkuen]

So Tom,
Why did Moy Yat get so pissed when he found out about Benny learning from Garrett Gee?

[sunkuen]

Glad to see yer back dude!!!