Saam Mo Kiu - do you really understand?

[BennyMeng]

If one truly understands Saam Mo Kiu in realms of martial arts, one will see shapes, techniques, forms, and style all as illusions or superficial at best.

Unfortunately, some of our own members are still confused and make comments like, "This is Ip Man. This is Chi Sim. This is Hung Fa Yi." These types of comments come from a mind that is still at the first layer of learning.

If I knock someone down with a Full Side Thrust Kick... is that Karate, Kung Fu, Taekwondo, Ip Man, Chi Sim, Hung Fa Yi... what's the proper label?

[JK Walz]

Originally posted by BennyMeng
If I knock someone down with a Full Side Thrust Kick... is that Karate, Kung Fu, Taekwondo, Ip Man, Chi Sim, Hung Fa Yi... what's the proper label?

It's a Full Side Thrust Kick.

JK

[sihing]

It's never about using perfect WC movement or techniques in a fight, it is about getting out alive and safe. So in the end it doesn't matter, where the " FULL SIDE THRUST KICK" came from, the key is that it was there when needed and got the job done.

James

[Cang Long]

Meng Sigung,
As said when referring to Tao time, space and energy when given a "label" are forever changed and no longer exist as they were without the "label" placed upon them. Like Tao, Saam Mo Kiu teaches the label of any action is less important than the intent awareness with which it is derived that being the proper time and space with the proper energy. In that sense a kick any kick or any action exist not because we want it to but as a physical universal truth we can both comprehend and execute.

[Azwingchun]

Unfortunately, some of our own members are still confused and make comments like, "This is Ip Man. This is Chi Sim. This is Hung Fa Yi." These types of comments come from a mind that is still at the first layer of learning.

I am glad to hear this being said, at least by someone other than myself. I once showed a Kung Fu brother a magazine years ago which had an article and some photos of a guy doing Wing Chun, almost all the photos showed the Sifu using the Phoenix eye fist for many of his attacks and even using the shape of the fist for his defenses. Example being, he used the shape of the Phoenix Eye fist in place of the more commonly seen Tan San. My Kung Fu brother stated that this wasn't Wing Chun, that he had added this technique. Even though this shape was shown to us in Bui Gee. But because he used it is a sense outside of what he had been taught it was all of a sudden wrong!

I think this happens alot in all martial arts, but being that Wing Chun is our system of choice we seem to notice this types of argument all to often.

Once in a discussion about if the dummy had 108, 112, or 116 movements, it was said that it didn't matter. It was still Wing Chun, and as long as the guiding core of the system is there , it still is the samething and one will still learn and develop great skill from it's lessons.

An open mind is a great thing. Closed minds never learn!

[Savi]

As I understand Saam Mo Kiu, I realize that thinking about it as a means to categorize all else is quite superficial.

Saam Mo Kiu points to the journey we travel throughout life. It helps us identify the stages of our past and present; in growth and as we are now.

I see Saam Mo Kiu pointing to (or reflecting) the natural progression/evolution of all things in life and death.

When I began to see things in this way, I realized I was looking at Time Space and Energy without the illusions of style, shape and preference. I began to see the relationship/connection of many things as one, as a whole and how everything exists in that one moment in time and space. Only then, did Saam Mo Kiu mean anything to me, is when I was able to relate my experience within the spectrum of Saam Mo Kiu right then and there.

I believe this to be the beginning of conceptual thought; a higher sense of being awake.

When I see its reflection in life, I feel a great swell of satisfaction, because I can accept things as they are. It brings a sense of harmony within me.

[Armin]

Sifu Meng,

If one truly understands Saam Mo Kiu in realms of martial arts, one will see shapes, techniques, forms, and style all as illusions or superficial at best.
As Bruce Lee said - at first, a punch is just a punch, and after long years of training a punch becomes just a punch again.

Unfortunately, some of our own members are still confused and make comments like, "This is Ip Man. This is Chi Sim. This is Hung Fa Yi." These types of comments come from a mind that is still at the first layer of learning.
Does this relate only to these three systems? Other systems do have the same structures, etc. Is there really a difference? The only thing I see, they start at different points and have different exercises - but the results are or should be the same. But as long as we don't reach the goal ...

If I knock someone down with a Full Side Thrust Kick... is that Karate, Kung Fu, Taekwondo, Ip Man, Chi Sim, Hung Fa Yi... what's the proper label?
If you get an 'ippon', than it surely was Karate, right? :D And if you don't get an 'ippon' because of kicking to the knee, than you did Ving Tsun!!! :D

It's always the same - people look at the outside, the exercises and the forms. 'Humans have two arms and two legs' - you all know that word - there can't be that big differences.

The only difference you may see, is how deep they lead the practitioner into technique-concept-principle. I'd say, that this is the true difference between systems or styles. Keeping that in mind, I'd say, that most systems 'stop' at the concept-level, due to e. g. formulating too many and too technical concepts. How many concepts do they have in kendo? The last thing I remember was something like 110 or more concepts!!! :eek: But will this lead to the principle-layer?

For some of you guys, who don't know my background: if been doing a lot of training with these karate- and okinawan-kempo-guys. If trained correctly, these systems follow the same principles was 'we' do in Ving Tsun. But there's one big difference: the principles aren't 'taught openly' in the katas - they are encoded. And even if you train the bunkai, there's no mentioning of 'concepts' or else. You are supposed to understand the concepts intuitif and without thinking.


Greetings,

Armin.

[Cang Long]

For some of you guys, who don't know my background: if been doing a lot of training with these karate- and okinawan-kempo-guys. If trained correctly, these systems follow the same principles was 'we' do in Ving Tsun. But there's one big difference: the principles aren't 'taught openly' in the katas - they are encoded. And even if you train the bunkai, there's no mentioning of 'concepts' or else. You are supposed to understand the concepts intuitif and without thinking. Armin,
Sounds rather interesting. Don't you think a teacher with considerable knowledge is also key to learning the depth of anything?

[Armin]

Cang long,

reading your question, it just occurs into my mind: a teacher is only a guide - knowledge is gained through own experience or, to put it into a more global idea, life.

I can only guess, but there surely was somebody, who reached the goal first (Buddha?) - but even he could just explain and give hints. And he had no teacher. You need practical experience, you need a life. Else, it would be enough to learn from video or books, right?

IMHO a teacher is what Frank Herbert called 'Muad'Dib' - a shortcut. If you try to do it by yourself, you may success, but there will be a lot of 'trys and errors'. A (good) teacher has gone the same way and he knows the direction and where to be careful.


Armin.

[JK Walz]

Originally posted by Savi
As I understand Saam Mo Kiu, I realize that thinking about it as a means to categorize all else is quite superficial.

I think you touched on what exactly Sigung was talking about. I think it is a very fine line we walk when it comes to our reason for pursuing anything.

My question would be-

Do you "identify" with Hung Fa Yi?

Please explain why or why not.

JK

[DavidE]

Originally posted by JK Walz
It's a Full Side Thrust Kick.

JK

WORD!

:bazooka: - karate
:spanka: - kung fu
:boxing: - well, boxing .........

all three are @55 whoopins !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-DavidE

[JamesHFYofAZ]

If I knock someone down with a Full Side Thrust Kick... is that Karate, Kung Fu, Taekwondo, Ip Man, Chi Sim, Hung Fa Yi... what's the proper label?
SMK- gives us insight when looking at thing, labels are their to identify thing, The actions is what SMK helps us define.
Its all of them, but with out self experience one can't relate it to SMK!
In mind eye this is a fau kiu question because it talks about technique and labels. Then again the greater cause is that it defeated the attacker, this would be more SK. The truth behind this question of SMK is WK. Since SMK is a journey within self only one can answer!

[duende]

Just thought I share something with you all...

In class last night a new student was expressing his frustration with himself to me because he could not fully remember the lesson we are currently working on.

I felt bad for him because he had expressed similar feelings to me the week before. At that time I told him to be patient, understand that KF takes time, and not be so hard on himself. I informed him that making mistakes was part of learning.

This time however it obviously was not getting through and I had to set him down and really get his attention so that I could talk to him.

What I told him was this... (many of you already know what I speak of, but for the benefit of new hfy108 members I want to tell it here)

The mind understands when it can't remember the lesson at hand, but how does the body know when it can't remember the lesson?? As a part of HFY learning stages the body has to go through the process of making mistakes and actually doing things wrong in order for it to be able to recognize the difference.

I explained to him the importance of this is because we don't think when we find ourselves in combat. We just react... there is nothing but our nature expressing itself in order to protect itself.

I say this here because Saam Mo Kiu is not just about wandering, awareness, and focus. It's not just about there being no right and no wrong... only different levels of understanding.

It's about patience. Patience to accept your nature and it's own unique path in life whether you like it or not.

And it's about patience to accept that somethings exist and grow in a place where time passes completely separate from the way time passes in our everyday lives.


In my experience, this is part of Saam Mo Kiu.

[Cang Long]

Interesting how Saam Mo Kiu is a learning progression that takes you from nowhere to somewhere but once you are somewhere there is always somewhere else to go.

[Savi]

Duende, thanks for sharing this POV of Saam Mo Kiu with us. I too look at Saam Mo Kiu in the philosophical vein of things. I would like to comment for all, on how *I* think this directly relates to combat.

Wandering --> Aware ---> Focus

Sigung Meng began the discussion with the question of whether or not the kick being thrown belongs to a certain style/technique. Is this really the question though? SMK, as it is taught in the combatative sense/reality, helps us to identify the right TSE to act with in relation to Maximum Efficiency.

"No" mind:
wild flailing fists with no consideration of anything -->

Conscious mind:
picking and choosing various kinds of punches based on awareness (certainty/uncertainty), emotion and the 5 senses -->

Awakened/Focused mind:
knowing when to move or not, hitting first when they move first. mechanics are based on factors of principle

With the knowledge of time space and energy - we can see things through Saam Mo Kiu to recognize, based on our or others' performance, what bridge of SMK is present at the given moment in Time.

The obvious goal is to exist and function from the Focused mind; the subconscious level. The only way to get there is to begin from Fau Kiu, just as we must begin life as a baby in order to become an adult. The HFY system reflects this progression called Saam Mo Kiu.

inefficient/ineffective/luck --> effective/luck ---> maximum efficiency

It doesn't matter what kick it was in the scenario. What matters is whether or not it was the proper TSE based on Maximum Efficiency.

What do you all think?

[JK Walz]

Originally posted by Savi

What do you all think?



I think at a surface level the question certainly is about whether or not your perception of the kick is if it belongs to one style or not. The question is a test of the understanding of SMK. If you understand the question, it’s like holding up an orange and asking “is this object round?”. The correct answer is obvious to those who understand. Some of us, myself included, have to think and ponder and contemplate in order to try to get close to it.

As to the topic at hand- Perhaps someone doesn’t know the answer, at a fau kiu level this could be your understanding. You can think of the side thrust kick as simply a technique delivered on a voluntary and planned basis in order to get a certain result. This shows a lack of understanding of even the existence of TSE.

Perhaps at the next level you begin to see the possibility of the existence of TSE. Maybe you even begin to use words and labels like Time, Space, and Energy to try to describe the spark of an idea you have about the nature of reality. In this case, the nature of reality is being exemplified by this perceived thing known as a “side thrust kick”.

Maybe once you have dwelled on what you think is the concept of TSE, side thrust kicks, and reality in general you have a moment when it all clicks, or comes together, and you intuitively realize that Time Space and Energy and “side thrust kicks” and anything you can think of are really the same thing! You realize intrinsically that Time Space and Energy do not exist as separate and definable entities or concepts at all. At this point the side thrust kick is once again simply a side thrust kick, however, the illusory views you generated getting to this point disappear- all of the clutter you generated getting to this point disappears and you are left with clear mind. You are no longer concerned with result (as you might have been at the FK level) and you are no longer concerned about action and TSE and how they “interact” (as you were at the SK level) because you have reached a level without levels- you have reached a level where reality simply is what it is and you cease trying to understand and control it.

Is this the subconscious level you are talking about, Savi? I think this reality might be what you are calling “Maximum Efficiency”.

However, I have to say that in my limited experience, I think “Maximum Efficiency” and “Time, Space, and Energy” are really the same thing. Once you begin to separate and differentiate you are back on the path of SK and FK.

JK

[Savi]

Good response JK. It is neither that you or I are correct or incorrect. Our answers are a reflection of what level we are at within Saam Mo Kiu.

Time Space and Energy and Maximum Efficiency (as I interpret) are definitely NOT the same thing. Why is that?

To say they are the same thing is also to say that everything we do is Maximum efficient. Based on your reasoning, anything to do with Time Space and Energy is just the same as being Maximum Efficient. Is this what you are conveying in your post?

Time Space and Energy exist in all stages of Saam Mo Kiu. However, there is only one stage where Maximum Efficiency is the reality.

In Fau Kiu existence, just because one may not be aware of TSE does not mean that it does not exist. Nor does it mean that they are exempt from this reality.

In Saan Kiu existence, just because one believes there is TSE does not mean that they are now at Maximum Efficiency. It certainly does not mean that they can harmonize TSE at will.

In Weng Kiu existence, experience lends one the complete ability to differentiate the varying snapshots of the interaction of TSE to what degree of harmony they show; even perhaps instantaneously. Just as the Buddha who showed the flower, and only one smiled because of the paradigm shift, instantaneously one can recognize the true nature of the reality.
I think “Maximum Efficiency” and “Time, Space, and Energy” are really the same thing. Once you begin to separate and differentiate you are back on the path of SK and FK.
Maximum Efficiency requires certain ingredients that can only be achieved with correct knowledge and body karma. By your definition, Maximum Efficiency exists at Fau Kiu and Saan Kiu because you state that TSE cannot be separated from Max. Eff. Then this means we are all Weng Kiu because we exist in TSE? Or you are saying that Fau Kiu and Saan Kiu do not have TSE.

I thought SMK was a tool to measure TSE.

Am I off target with your post?

[JK Walz]

Originally posted by Savi
To say they are the same thing is also to say that everything we do is Maximum efficient. Based on your reasoning, anything to do with Time Space and Energy is just the same as being Maximum Efficient. Is this what you are conveying in your post?

Savi-

You are absolutely correct. After reading my post I realize that I equated any level of the understanding of TSE with Maximum Efficiency (ME). I apologize, I should have been more careful in my post.

What I am trying to say is that Maximum Efficiency is a complete and intuitive understanding of TSE. I am also saying that at this level TSE/Maximum Efficiency/Ultimate Reality/Side Trust Kicks/** insert object or action here ** are essentially the same thing. If you are truly at this level, then you cannot differentiate and discriminate between anything. If you start to see differences between things (time, space, energy, styles, punches, kicks, interceptions, jogging, brushing your teeth, training methodologies…etc) you are no longer at the WK level.


Maximum Efficiency requires certain ingredients that can only be achieved with correct knowledge and body karma. By your definition, Maximum Efficiency exists at Fau Kiu and Saan Kiu because you state that TSE cannot be separated from Max. Eff. Then this means we are all Weng Kiu because we exist in TSE? Or you are saying that Fau Kiu and Saan Kiu do not have TSE.


All three levels of SMK must have TSE present because they allegedly exist in reality. It is the degree at which the mind comprehends TSE that places that it at a certain “level”.

No understanding = Fau Kiu

Some understanding, or, realization of the existence of TSE = Saan Kiu

Complete and intuitive (this is the big one!) understanding that TSE is a single concept and that it cannot be separated from reality = Weng Kiu (ME)

I hope I am more clear this time, sorry.

Thanks- JK

[C. Saint Pierre]

With the understanding that Words are at the level of San Kiu:

A Sidekick out of pure instinct is Fau Kiu.
A sidekick out of pure intent is San Kiu.
A sidekick out of pure compassion is Weng Kiu.

The instinct of Fau Kiu manifests as fight or flight.
The intent of San Kiu manifests as natural conscious action.
The compassion of Weng Kiu manifests as natural unconscious adaptive response.

A person who performs an unconscious sidekick out of fear does so at the Fau Kiu level.
A person who performs a conscious sidekick out of anger, thought, or desire does so at the San Kiu level.
A person who performs a sidekick because it's the most compassionate and natural way to respond adaptively in the given situation does so at the Weng Kiu level. At this level, the sidekick is as natural and unconscious as breathing.

Au Revoir,
Christian