Wing Chun - Style or Principle

[splodge]

Hi,

Having read many posts in other forums regarding Wing Chun it seems to me that people fall into two camps:

1. Those who feel that Wing Chun is a style, by that I mean it is fixed and the technique is specific and final. You cannot deviate from the specific form of the technique and it is limited to that specific movement.

2. Those who feel that Wing Chun is a principle based system, for example you learn the principle of a punch and then develop and practice punches based on those principles but it is the principle that drives the development and not the form so it can branch of into other techniques based on the given principles.

At the risk of riots I was wondering how you would class Wing Chun? Style or Principle...............and why?!

I have asked this before in a different forum and almost everyone stressed principle but the amount of posts in WC forums that go against this idea doesnt seem to stack up with the feedback on this question. As this forum seems to be a more focussed and knowledgeable group of wing chun practitioners I would appreciate your thoughts.

Thanks,
Splodge

[FooFighter]

William James defined people as tender mindedness or tough mindness temperaments. It is rare that we embody an extremes, but we do have a certain bias ratio. Rationalists (tender mindedness) are lovers of principles/ideas and believe truth is first comes through the mind than to the senses. The Empirical thinkers (tough mindedness) are lovers of experience, facts, hard evidence through the senses. These folks believe that truth comes through senses than the mind. The early Hong Kong wing chun students of Yip Man who became internationally famous fighters tend to have the tough mindness temperament bias ratio?

These men of wing chun earned the truth through their real life experiences than intellectual arguments of the angles of bong, tan, and fok saoes. If your won fights against others styles, then your wing chun brothers listened. Yip Man seemed to encourage his boys to seek out their own personal experience and test out his theories instead of taking the arm chair rationalist's approach. In the 50's and 60's American martial culture seem to embody the rationalist's temperament when it came to the martial arts (not including the popularity of western boxing). This rationalist temperament of katas based training, no contact point fighting, and arm chair philosophy martial approach would made inexperienced wing chun yet talented Bruce Lee seem like a genuis. I believe Bruce Lee was a genius but when you put things into perspective. When everyone is average and lazy, your hard work and discipline makes you look like a genius. In our times, the tough mindedness vs. rationalism is still a reality. The heated arguments here are based on these kinds of temperaments. You will have the tough minded seeking reality-based fighting and then have your rationalist begging the tough minded to remember the finer things like the ideals and principles of wing chun. Rationalist: "Chi Sao teaches you the finer core principles of wing chun" Tough minded, "Sparring will help to win and comfirm our principles." The wheels goes around and around. LOL.

To me wing chun should be a healthy balance of theory and application. I favor personal experience and truth comes first through real world experience than second handed knowledge/ principles. I have been really influenced by Sifu Alan Lee and Sibak Duncan Leung. I would say these men are pragmatists, but they also teach the importance of knowing theory. For me men of action is more attractive than the ivy tower martial professor who paints, plays music, and heals the sick with anicent oriental medicine. Lee Sifu and Leung Sibak are my role models of wing chun excellence. These men are techniques first and theory second and this works for me. Maybe this doesn't work for the rationalists? I am not a man who hate rationalism. I do apprenicate the beauty and truth of principles only if I can experience it first hand. Heaven is a beautiful idea, but making money in the rat race has to be taken care of first before I see the kingdom. <wink> I personally believe that I have should core principles or beliefs as my guide, but I should be more pragmatical. Meaning developing my technical skills and devleoping physical atritubes will make a real world difference than knowing the precise ideals and principles of wing chun. It is my belief that the line between theory and expeirence are false. We should not think so much with the line in middle, but should focus on and do what the average or lazy martial artists won't do so that our hard work and discipline would make us look like a genius. This also mean doing what we have been lazt to do in our lives as martial artists. Well that is my two cents.

[KPM]

Why does it have to be an "either/or" proposition. I see it as a case of "both/and." Wing Chun is both a style and a principle based system.

Keith

[kung fu fighter]

Hi,


I agree with Keith that it's both. Mental thoughts(Theories and principles) are intangable where as physical movements (the style) are tangable, so therefore in my opinion the style was passed down as a tool to teach how the theories and principles of the system should be applied in 3 D reality according to wing chun principles/theories as well as how to cultivate the proper body mechanics and attributes.

Once you finish the system and have a firm understanding of both, you become free from both because they are just a guide for the student going through the system. At advance levels in wing chun when you have completed the entire system, you become very creative and fluid like water. Just like any artist weather it's a musician, painter etc.

So one can say that the wing chun student who is learning how to apply the style and theories are at the scientist level of the wing chun system similar to a painter learning basic strokes and guidlines, where as the advance wing chun practioner transends the science into art or freedom of expression and creativity.

[Hendrik]

Originally Posted by kung fu fighter

So one can say that the wing chun student who is learning how to apply the style and theories are at the scientist level of the wing chun system similar to a painter learning basic strokes and guidlines,

where as the advance wing chun practioner transends the science into art or freedom of expression and creativity.

Excelllent Perspective and View.

[hen]

What is a style without principles/theories ????

[Lindley]

The term "Style" often conotates something that is confined to being one way.

Ving Tsun Kung Fu is a system, as are most martial arts. The idea is that martial arts training, in general, should not be "limited". Each art should serve as a guide, which all came from a person (or group of persons) perspective at some time in history for some purpose. Nothing magical. The beauty of Ving Tsun is that it's principles can be extracted to other arts. The Ving Tsun system gives you three core techniques - bong, tan, fuk. But these serve as examples for the system to help you understand what supports these techniques. Once you master the system, you can extend that understanding to any techniques.

One should not feel they are doing something untraditional or extraordinary by adding things. However, one must make the distiniction between Ving Tsun and their own Kung Fu. Ving Tsun is the foundation, while your own kung fu is the compilation of your own experiences, body type, and interpretations.

"Kung Fu is not taught, but learned..."

Good luck in your kung fu...

[Jam_master]

Originally Posted by Lindley

The term "Style" often conotates something that is confined to being one way.

Ving Tsun Kung Fu is a system, as are most martial arts. The idea is that martial arts training, in general, should not be "limited". Each art should serve as a guide, which all came from a person (or group of persons) perspective at some time in history for some purpose. Nothing magical. The beauty of Ving Tsun is that it's principles can be extracted to other arts. The Ving Tsun system gives you three core techniques - bong, tan, fuk. But these serve as examples for the system to help you understand what supports these techniques. Once you master the system, you can extend that understanding to any techniques.

One should not feel they are doing something untraditional or extraordinary by adding things. However, one must make the distiniction between Ving Tsun and their own Kung Fu. Ving Tsun is the foundation, while your own kung fu is the compilation of your own experiences, body type, and interpretations.

"Kung Fu is not taught, but learned..."

Good luck in your kung fu...

Well said!

Let me also add in support that the principles and its applications are somewhat synonymous. The principles I would say even dictates the execution and perhaps even the style itself (how it looks in application) which is why most wing chun practicioners of any family or same, may have individual expression or interpretation, but at its core, you can almost always tell its wing chun in origin, good or bad.

[ghostofwingchun]

Originally Posted by KPM

Why does it have to be an "either/or" proposition. I see it as a case of "both/and." Wing Chun is both a style and a principle based system.

Keith

Can someone explain to me what a principle based system is.

Thanks,

Ghost

[Lindley]

Ghost,

When I fight or play Chi Sao I do not focus on the techniques executed by my hands or legs. I focus on my purpose - controlling the centerline. This is based on understanding of the centerline - shortest distance, facing, and unity of hands. These are principles. That being said, the techniques just come out, instinctively. Not choreographed responses. This is developed over time, over countless hours of playing chi sao.

Some Wing Chun guys focus on a particular response to a particular attack. Drills. While this can be useful, it can also your ball and chain. As a principally based system, the chun allows for self expression and the potential for success as you develope and enhance understanding yourself with relevance to the world. Some arts focus on hitting harder and being stronger. That is good, but not complete. To be complete one must also understand the principles of their system and use attributes such as balance, coordination, timing, sensitivity, and relaxation to support your techniques.

Principles guide you.

Good luck in your kung fu

[ghostofwingchun]

Originally Posted by Lindley

Ghost,

When I fight or play Chi Sao I do not focus on the techniques executed by my hands or legs. I focus on my purpose - controlling the centerline. This is based on understanding of the centerline - shortest distance, facing, and unity of hands. These are principles. That being said, the techniques just come out, instinctively. Not choreographed responses. This is developed over time, over countless hours of playing chi sao.

Some Wing Chun guys focus on a particular response to a particular attack. Drills. While this can be useful, it can also your ball and chain. As a principally based system, the chun allows for self expression and the potential for success as you develope and enhance understanding yourself with relevance to the world. Some arts focus on hitting harder and being stronger. That is good, but not complete. To be complete one must also understand the principles of their system and use attributes such as balance, coordination, timing, sensitivity, and relaxation to support your techniques.

Principles guide you.

Good luck in your kung fu

Thank you so much for your response! As wing chun is a principally based system, can you tell me how many principles make up that base in wing chun?

Thanks,

Ghost

[anerlich]

can you tell me how many principles make up that base in wing chun?

Depends who you ask.

Google "kuen kuit" for some insights.

In my lineage, you have

Central Line

contact reflexes

watch/cover elbows and knees

economy of movement

Redirection of opponent's force

use of all limbs independently, simultaneous attack and defense

break the opp's balance

create openings

Control the elbow

Cross the opponent's arms

[ghostofwingchun]

Thank you so much Mr. anerlich for your reply! I have seen many references to wing chun being principle based . . . now you say the principles depend on who I ask. If the basis of wing chun are certain principles, shouldn't everyone practicing wing chun have the same ones? . . . otherwise different people have different basis. Can the same martial art have different basis? I don't know.

I'm having difficulty understanding this idea of principle basis . . . does having some principles make some thing principle based? Is boxing principle based? If yes, why . . . if not, why? This comparison may help me understand.

Thanks,

Ghost

[KPM]

Originally Posted by ghostofwingchun

If the basis of wing chun are certain principles, shouldn't everyone practicing wing chun have the same ones? . . . otherwise different people have different basis. Can the same martial art have different basis? I don't know.

As I noted before, Wing Chun is both a style and a principle based system. You are confused because you are trying to see it as one without the other. The principles are expressed through the "style" of Wing Chun....its structure and techniques. The "principles" of Wing Chun guides us in the application and use of those techniques. So, while we are "principle based", the system is somewhat "closed" in that we have specific ways in which we apply those principles....the structure and technique of Wing Chun. In contrast, our cousin Jeet Kune Do is also principle or concept based, but more "open". It is much less of a defined "style." Therefore you will see some JKD people expressing the principles and concepts of their system through the exact techniques passed on by Bruce Lee, while others will express them through the techniques of Kali/Escrima, and still others will have much more of a Mixed Martial Art look. Often what you are seeing as having different principles within Wing Chun is simply different ways to state the same thing. Afterall, it IS a principle or concept and not a set of laws to live by.

Keith

[ghostofwingchun]

Thank you Mr. Keith for your reply! I am still confused because what you say seems to apply to just about every martial art . . . so are all martial arts principle based?

Thanks,

Ghost