Changes?!

[Armin]

Hi (or: guten morgen!),

I'd like to share some thoughts. In another thread I read something like "what Wing Chun could you have learned from Wong Wah Bo?". I understand this question as: "How much of knowledge about Wing Chun weren't we (or his successors) able to learn from him?"

Counter-question: Would his Wing Chun work in our times? Imagine the systems he had to fight against - mostly Shaolin-based systems. How often do we counter such systems? I didn't had any trouble with these guys, but with Kick- and Thai-Boxers. As I know so far, Yip Man did change e. g. the forms to match the demands, that were set by the influence of "new" systems coming to China. Best example is the Gaun Sau in sixth set, that was integrated, after Wong Shun Leung had a fight, were he made good use of this technique.

Hm, and how about the principles? Did they change? I'm not too sure about this point, but that would be an explanation of the different styles of early and late Yip Man-disciples.

Well, Wing Chun is a weapon. Does the use of a weapon of the 19th century make any sense in the 21st century? Imagine a soldier with a muzzle-loader fighting against a soldier with a M16.

And another thought: Wing Chun is a strictly logical system. someone once said, that a smart guy, that knew the two first forms, could definitely be able to make up the rest just by thinking and trying. How about that?


Have a nice day,

Armin.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

First off, thank you for sharing your thought with all.
"How much of knowledge about Wing Chun weren't we (or his successors) able to learn from him?"
I would think that if taught a complete system then one leaned a complete system. My thought would be, in tradition a master kept a successor until they felt there was no more they could teach the student.

Would his Wing Chun work in our times? Don't know, I’ve never met someone that old. LOL
Having been told stories of those times but never knowing through experiencing those time, I could not see how one could compare the here and the then.
Hm, and how about the principles? Did they change? I'm not too sure about this point, but that would be an explanation of the different styles of early and late Yip Man-disciples.
Principles that change do not sound like principle. It sound like personal expression, this would indicate that one has either mimicked another expression or change something that should not of changed. This would create personal style. If its not working do we change it or trace back to where it first went wrong?

Well, Wing Chun is a weapon. Does the use of a weapon of the 19th century make any sense in the 21st century? Imagine a soldier with a muzzle-loader fighting against a soldier with a M16.
I would use the musket because your enemy will be so shacked that you have more then enough time to defeat them!LOL
Thanks for sharing the thoughts you had!
-JamesHFYofAZ

[Armin]

Hi JamesHFYofAZ,

Don't know, I’ve never met someone that old. LOL
Having been told stories of those times but never knowing through experiencing those time, I could not see how one could compare the here and the then
Oh, yes, of course you can! Remember the beginning of the UFCs and the shockwave the Gracies started? No Wing Chun-guy ever thought of "ground-fighting" or "anti-grappling" before. And shortly afterwards everyone started inventig their own systems. Before, everyone said "We don't need that - we don't go down.", now everyone says "We need that - we don't like do go down, but we need it, just for the case". In my eyes, that is a clear changing in concepts and a change in "weapons-technique", too.

Principles that change do not sound like principle. It sound like personal expression, this would indicate that one has either mimicked another expression or change something that should not of changed. This would create personal style. If its not working do we change it or trace back to where it first went wrong?
Hm, after all, principles are made by humans, too. They are just a "picture", that was made. Some principles (the "good" ones) get close to realitiy, some don't. The ones that don't match with realitiy have to be improved or corrected. It takes hundreds of years to make sure, that most principles work in reality. But there are still some, that can and need to be improved. Don't you think?


I would use the musket because your enemy will be so shacked that you have more then enough time to defeat them!LOL
Yes, but he will pull the trigger by accident, because he fell to the ground. Another case of collateral damage! ;)


Many thanks, too!

Armin.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

No Wing Chun-guy ever thought of "ground-fighting" or "anti-grappling" before.
This is a very strong statement. In the past, WC was never seen dealing with grapplers, not to say it was not with-in the systems that are out there. Nevertheless, you are correct when you say that a bunch of people have added grappling to learn how to defend against it. This is probable because they truly never had a complete system! Just a thought!
We don't need that - we don't go down.", I still say that you shouldn’t go to the ground. If you are put on the ground by an attack then one has misunderstood the proper time and space to use their style of WC, or its what they are using. not truly knowing their WC and how to use it. This may be due to the lack of principle/concepts or lack of understanding of those principles and concepts. This supports your statement below. that is a clear changing in concepts and a change in "weapons-technique", too.
Hm, after all, principles are made by humans, too. They are just a "picture", that was made. Some principles (the "good" ones) get close to realitiy, some don't. The ones that don't match with realitiy have to be improved or corrected. It takes hundreds of years to make sure, that most principles work in reality. But there are still some, that can and need to be improved. Don't you think?
I would agree if speaking from a yip man wing chun. On the other hand, I have found no corrections needed it the HFY system just found them in my self .
Yes, but he will pull the trigger by accident, because he fell to the ground. Another case of collateral damage!
If my WC is good, the bullet will never hit me.
:bazooka::D

[Armin]

Hi JamesHFYofAZ,

you make some good points!

This is a very strong statement. In the past, WC was never seen dealing with grapplers, not to say it was not with-in the systems that are out there. Nevertheless, you are correct when you say that a bunch of people have added grappling to learn how to defend against it. This is probable because they truly never had a complete system! Just a thought!
Hm, wow! But I don't want to be the one who tells these people, that their system isn't comlpete!!! :D

I still say that you shouldn’t go to the ground. If you are put on the ground by an attack then one has misunderstood the proper time and space to use their style of WC, or its what they are using. not truly knowing their WC and how to use it. This may be due to the lack of principle/concepts or lack of understanding of those principles and concepts.
What a difference! Most Wong Shun Leung-Ving Tsun-guys state, that they needn't go to the ground - you say you shouldn't. "Wong sifu never had to go to the ground" - say all his diract students - "So we don't have to train that."

No, you're right. The principles are there - you just have to make them work (for you) in all situations. The techniqual application is something totally different.

I've been reading a lot in "Mastering Kung Fu" - there it is written, that Wing Chun (or HFY) is a system for all ranges. If I still were a WT-technician, I would agree fully. Now, after all these years of training with other Wing Chun-styles and people out of other systems, I have to admit, that I see things a little different!

In my eyes, Wing Chun is definitely a knife-based system. And since Marc McYoungs Videos "Surviving the knife", we know, that knife-fighting is close-contact fighting. And when we take a look at the forms, than we find out, that most movement is done by the hands/arms. Sure, we have kicks and some leg-movements like Huen Gerk. To keep it short: I share the thought with Wong's students, that Wing Chun, the Yip Man Wing Chun, is a boxing system, not a kicking- or a throwing-and-going-to-the-ground-system.

And what about the long-pole??? Well, it was "imported" later. It definitely follows and uses Wing Chun-principles. But it wasn't part of the "original Wing Chun" and has, on the first sight, nothing to do with the weaponless part (of course, the deeper understanding of the centerline-theory and the correction of body-structure is an important part the longpole).

I would agree if speaking from a yip man wing chun. On the other hand, I have found no corrections needed it the HFY system just found them in my self .
Please, don't do that - I have no idea of the HFY-system! All I can do, is guess! But, to be honest, it's hard for me to believe, that there have been no changes, since the beginning. HFY is a living system - so it has to evolute. There's no living without evolution, no?!

Of course, it evolutes in ourselves, respectevily in you. Hm, ok, I'll try an example with the most important principle of all systems: the teaching system. In Wing Chun and HFY the oral teaching one-on-one is very important. But understanding depends very much an social background, on the language that is in "fashion" and given physical facts. You speak different than a chinese of the 19th century, you live and eat different, your knowledge is totally different. Some things were nothing new to this chinese, but they are for you. On the other hand, our early chinese maybe knew nothing about physics, body mechanics and training methods. But you know. So a teacher in the 19th century had to have a different teaching system. How much did you know about Buddhism, before you started your martial arts-carrer? Nothing, like tho most of us?! Your teacher had to teach you everything. How ybout the young chinese? He was born Buddhist. And do you really believe in Buddhism or are you a christian? You see the problems?

Another example. Most Gung fu styles are "long bridge"-systems. Wing Chun never had to handle "short bridge"-systems - in fact, Wing Chun is a short bridge-system, that's what made Wing Chun so successfull. But the normal Wing Chun-fighter never faught against one of the own familiy (or better: he shouldn't - after all, we are one family!). Somewhere I read, that in the 1950s or 1960s there was a tournament, were highly motivated Wing Chun-fighters took part. And every single one lost his fights, mostly against fighters from boxing-styles (short-bridge). Afterwards they claimed, that they hurt their hands on the protection-gear, everyone was wearing. They simply weren't used to fight against short bridge-systems.

Only some had the experience, Wong Shun Leung and others - and they changed, or modernized/influenced, the whole system.

If my WC is good, the bullet will never hit me.
:bazooka: :D
Bong Sao or Tan Sao??? :eek:


Armin.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

But I don't want to be the one who tells these people, that their system isn't complete!!!
I've tried, they don't listen. It could be due to stubbornness or just ego. When I trained BJJ, I thought it was the best and then found out later by an unknown WC guy who put me in my place. At that time I new nothing of WC, all I new was that my little knowledge of martial arts was not enough. I think back with gratefulness, gratefulness because what I thought was real was not real enough. If I still were a WT-technician, I would agree fully. Now, after all these years of training with other Wing Chun-styles and people out of other systems, I have to admit, that I see things a little different! May I ask why you say that? In addition, to reply to this, I would have to say that HFY IS an all ranges system. This does not mean that one uses long kicks in long kicking range or grapple to the ground, but how to defeat it instead. After long kicks comes short kicks long bridge, long punching. HFY- how to bridge long arm and properly defend space of all gates, upper and lower.
to be honest, it's hard for me to believe, that there have been no changes, since the beginning. HFY is a living system - so it has to evolute. There's no living without evolution, no?!
No- I say this because the principles and concepts have never and will never change. The technician/practitioner is only as good as their understandings (Sam Mo Kiu), but the system, well the system is full and if one changes it then it now longer is the same therefore loosing its truth/reality, there after becoming allusion. Only self will evolve within self as one travels through the changing progressions of Sam mo Kiu! I guess you already answered that! Of course, it evolutes in ourselves, respectevily in you.
understanding depends very much an social background, on the language that is in "fashion" and given physical facts. You speak different than a chinese of the 19th century, you live and eat different, your knowledge is totally different. Some things were nothing new to this chinese, but they are for you
This describes Sam Mo Kiu, as u first hears something you hear what you first want (Fau Kiu). A true master will drill you until he feels you are weng kiu in understanding (mind and or body).
our early Chinese maybe knew nothing about physics, body mechanics and training methods. But you know. hate to disagree but if the Chinese ancestors could find points in the body that act as gates in energies pathways they surly could find the most efficient way to deal with defending space. They did in fact map out the bodies strengths and weaknesses structurally.
How much did you know about Buddhism, before you started your martial arts-carrer? Nothing, like tho most of us?! Your teacher had to teach you everything. How ybout the young chinese? He was born Buddhist. And do you really believe in Buddhism or are you a christian? You see the problems?
I was raised with Christian morals and the typical western mindset. I then learned there was more, not only by my Sifu but also by experiences. I still, to this day and through the future will look for essence in and of... Good fortune to you and look for what you believe. Its the easiest to find!!! Then one can find the second level of understanding!!

[JamesHFYofAZ]

This is a good example of fau kiu kung fu against a grappler!!:DFAU KIU (http://www.goshin-kan.com/yongchun/Galerie.html) Fun times!

[Armin]

Hi JamesHFYofAZ,

hehe, nice link! ;)

Ahm, I get the feeling, you got me a little wrong. Ok, I'm not talking of BJJ, Karate, Judo, TKD, JKD or even HFY - as I said: I have no idea or not enough knowledge of these systems to rate them. See, I have a lot of experience in other systems, but I have the feeling, that I didn't train them long enough, to say, that they are this and that - this will need several years of serious training. I am talking about the Yip Man-derivates.

Ok, let's go on.

I say this because the principles and concepts have never and will never change.
Ah, ok, I understand. No, I didn't want to say, that the principles change - but the way of describing them. After all, we just make "small" pictures of the world to understand the world. What we try, is to describe something, that can't be described in one single big concept. Instead we "brake" it down into several single concepts. I don't question the concept - I question the way of describing it. Everything we try is getting close to truth, but we can't hit the mark! There will always be something unfathomable (word correct???), something that you can't touch or explain. It's there, right before your nose, but you can't see it - just hints. (Well, it's hard to me, to find the right words in english, sorry!).

Hope, I made myself clearer.


Armin.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

Please, no need to apologize I do in fact see you.

Let me rephrase a few things for you so that we may understand one another. First, when learning ones way through the Sam Mo Kiu progression, one faces challenges such as understanding- understanding can change due to experience. Knowledge will then grow due to this experience. Following then one will demand more knowledge because there understanding is unclear due to it dissolving before them. After finding more and then truly understanding one is struck with reality and reality will tell you if you are right or wrong. A perfect example of this-


I had an experience that has stuck in my mind. It took place at a kung fu seminar about a year ago. The instructor/Master asked everyone to draw a picture of an image like flower using lines and circles. He gathered the pictures, looked through them briefly, and proceeded to pull one out of the stack. When he shows the picture to the audience, he asked everyone to tell him what this was a picture of and who the artist was. I raised my hand and answered, that is my identity sir. He looked at me, smiled, and then ripped my picture in two. I replied to his actions verbally by saying, “sir, you just destroyed my identity.” He then held his own up and asked again, “What do you see?” “It was a bunch of line and circles scattered about.” I responded with hesitation. He said that what he sees is time, space, and energy. He then went in to talking about how people have attachments, and how they cling to things instead of welcoming change.

The thing that I thought about back then was my identity, how do I build and develop self. I later understood more of self and thought again about that experience. I took a different, more in depth look at that experience. Was I stuck in allusion of searching? Was I looking through thoughts already explored? Step back, take a breath, and now realize that one is still holding on. Let time pass and things are still present, but when in the present, does one see them in the here and now? I understood that I lived in the past instead of being in the here and now. This is the way to the future. Here and now, I have learned once again from the past. This intern will affect the tomorrow.

Just a few days ago, I recalled the same experience and with a smile, I realized what he spoke of. I could finally see through my clouded mind as if the storm was over. Then I saw peace which was nothingness, and this nothingness sent cheer through my body. It enlightened my spirit with a sense of glowing reality. This overwhelming glow of life flourished as I reminisced of the past. Not thinking of what was, but of what is and how it has changed. This change of growth is life. Life is a process of changing and learning about life, death and the existence within the time and space of the here and now.
Digest this and we can talk or give me a principle that need discussing, This I would find to be akung fu learning experience!

[duende]

Hey Armin, James...

Very intersting discussion you two are having. Thanks for sharing both of your insights.

Let me just say that in my HFY experience I have witnessed many many interactions of GM Gee and my Sihings with other WC schools.

Time and time again, students and masters alike have come to our school only to leave with a new understanding of the nature of Time Space and Energy. There are even a few individuals who have visited who were full of disbelief and cynicism about the HFY formula itself. But they too saw the incredible source of knowledge in HFY.

However, here online, the usage of text does not do justice to the WC concepts we our trying to communicate. The translation from Chinese to english in itself has alot to do with it. Many double/triple layered meanings within the Chinese explanantions can only be accurately expressed in what some may consider to be long winded scientific vocabulary.

But with all that said... do I think anything's ever lost??

No. Sometimes us western minded individuals go off track and may loose focus, but we are always steered back in the right direction. The cultural gap does make things take longer... No doubt about it. But patience is key to learning KF anyways right?

Also, in HFY the concepts are ultimately what is most important. Not technique #154 to be used against move #465.

Last night I was reminded again that I could either be given a fish. Or taught how to fish for myself. I could either be given a certain technique for a certain scenario, or I could be taught the concepts behind all techniques and all scenarios.


I can understand how other MA's find this hard to swallow. Just last week on KFO there was this uproar about the cover of MKF. A few WC practioners were making comments on how the cover was a non-realistic photo. Full fledged Sifus saying that there combined WC and TKD experience told them that it was impossible.

Well... yesterday we finally circled back around in our classes to where a demostration of the reaction that takes place on the MKF cover was applicable to the lesson at hand.

Let's just say that I'm very grateful for my Kung Fu experience. And all the TKD blackbelts in my class (3 of them) now know beyond any doubt that a roundhouse kick can easily be bridged by a Faat Sau.

As far as grappling is concerned. Yes, it can appear intimidating at first. But once you find your WC focus, and separate your thinking from all the BJJ/JUDO/Wrestling techniques, then it is much much more easy to focus on what actually is going on.

There is no new technology in hand to hand combat. We have not developed any third arm, or leg that can bend in any direction. We are stuck with the same tools that our ancestors had. To be honest, grappling was one of the first martial arts right?? So if anything, they need to evolve. Many doubt the integrity/validity of the UFC in the Gracie years, but that's another conversation. Regardless, strikers are winning those competitions again. Turns our learning the ground battle wasn't that hard for them. And now you have the Gracies learning WC. Go figure....

So if you ask me, I'd say the newest technology in Martial Arts is using the physic and structure of the human body to it's fullest scientific potential. Using Body Mass to occupy and dominate space strategicly. Knowing how to cultivate proper Jing energy and being fully aware of the natures of energy. Understanding and preparing yourself mentally and physically for the unkown and random elements of fighting and knowing how to focus on them with in your own 6 gates.

Just my thoughts...

[JamesHFYofAZ]

couldn't say that any better. Your statement is truth in itself.
Thx and see you in a week!

[duende]

Thanks James...

It's obvious that both of us have been profoundly moved by our HFY experience.

Yep... see you in a week.

[JamesHFYofAZ]

Its still almost two week until the seminar, man I am just wishin it was one week i guess. Im sure it will come soon enough. :D CANT WAIT!!!:cool:

[Armin]

Hi,

sorry, I've been very busy the last few days - no time, to answer.

Hm, we have two problems - we don't share the same language (but hey, I do the best I can! ;) ) and we don't share the same background, i. e. the same "technical language". But I feel, that we are getting close to each other, aren't we?

Somehow I have the feeling that we talk of the same thing, but in different and misleading ways. We all have had some very amazing experiences, that made us think and made us go some steps further on our way. Hopefully, there will be a lot more experiences of that kind, so we can grow on and on!


Armin.

[passing_through]

Howdy Fellas,

Just getting back to reading the board and wanted to comment a bit on some things in this thread. But first, this has been a very good thread - we need more like these, yo.

Armin posted, In my eyes, Wing Chun is definitely a knife-based system... And when we take a look at the forms, than we find out, that most movement is done by the hands/arms. Sure, we have kicks and some leg-movements like Huen Gerk. To keep it short: I share the thought with Wong's students, that Wing Chun, the Yip Man Wing Chun, is a boxing system, not a kicking- or a throwing-and-going-to-the-ground-system.

And what about the long-pole??? Well, it was "imported" later. It definitely follows and uses Wing Chun-principles. But it wasn't part of the "original Wing Chun" and has, on the first sight, nothing to do with the weaponless part (of course, the deeper understanding of the centerline-theory and the correction of body-structure is an important part the longpole).

One thing to keep in mind when discussing the Ip Man system is the timeframe the system was developed in. In Hong Kong of the 1950s-1970s, the martial arts culture was focused more on striking/trapping/kiu sau type training/application rather than long range kicking (the specialization of Olympic Taekwondo training methods) or grappling (the specialization of the Gracie family of Juijitsu). In Shaolin Wing Chun parlance, during the 1950s-1970s the Ip Man system was focused on the Human gate. From this point of view, this explains much of their expression of the principles and concepts of their system. The environment revolved around the Human gate so the techniques did as well.

Sincerely,
Jeremy R.

[Armin]

Hi!

@ Jeremy R.:

Well, yeah. You're right, that's something to keep in mind. There's not only the different technical expression but a totally different "technical language" - using the same words, but meaning something different.

Well, how to express this thought? Ok, look, I'm not only here to talk to people, but to learn something. Most learning is done by learning a new kind of "language". Language is the expression of ones state of mind. If you are able to put your "technical language" on a higher level, than your understanding will be put on higher level. I did learn a lot from "mastering Kung Fu", but there are some questions left, that couldn't be answered in a book.

I'm glad, that Sifu Meng gave me the opportunity, to write, read and learn here - and there will be some more opportunities for me in the future.

As you (and everbody else) will see, I'm open-minded and I have no problem with admitting that I'm wrong. JamesHFYofAZ did give me a whole lot to think about. So, there's another problem - bringing every "new" (for me that's new) idea into context with my experiences.


Yours,

Armin.