this is to let you all know how deeply the buk sing and hung sing
branches feel for your earth shattering news that jeong yim really is the true founder of choy lee fut and that chan heung is only considered the ancestor of the great jeong hung sing. sometimes we all have the rug pulled from under us, just as you just have. but as i have stated previously, "CHOY LEE FUT WOULD NOT BE CHOY LEE FUT IF IT WERE NOT FOR JEONG HUNG SING, AND WITH OUT THE HUNG SING AND BUK SING SCHOOLS CHOY LEE FUT WOULD BE DRASTICALLY REDUCED TO CHAN HEUNG. BUT THANKS TO THE EFFORTS OF JEONG YIM AND TAM SAM, CHOY LEE FUT HAS 3 GREAT FAMILIES, INSTEAD OF JUST ONE OLD BORING ONE.
BROTHERS OF THE CHAN FAMILY, WE ARE HERE FOR YOU. FEEL FREE TO CONTACT EITHER MYSELF OF SIFU DAVE LACEY WHO ARE BOTH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE 2 BRANCHES I HAVE MENTIONED.
I AM SURE SIFU D LACEY WOULD LOVE TO DISCUSS HISTORICAL ASPECTS OF CLF IN LENGTH.
HAVE BEEN CORDIALLY INVITED TO PARTICIPATE IN A ONE ON ONE DISCUSSION OF THIS EXTREMELY TOUCHY SUBJECT.
No..the Lacey’s are not representative at all IMNSHO. But in this ongoing and very rediculous posturing, I remain silent except for this:
…does anyone know what Lai Hung has to say about this? He was after all, the director of the United States Pek Hsing CLF Association at one time and in 1996 was acknowledged by a supposed congress of CLF elders as the head of the international Pek Hsing CLF family…no small feat. Plus I believe he taught both of the Lacey brother’s early in their career
Oh, one more thing…is there a written notice pronouncement by the ‘congress of elders’ on the founder or cofounder of CLF? I’ll assume there are elders in Hong Kong or whereever that are stating this change in history. Has anyoen been privy to this document or is it merely ‘He said…I said…therefore…’
And please, let’s try to remain civil. Personal ignorant attacks on me and mine will go unanswered for obvious reasons.
Oh, one more thing…is there a written notice pronouncement by the ‘congress of elders’ on the founder or cofounder of CLF? I’ll assume there are elders in Hong Kong or whereever that are stating this change in history. Has anyoen been privy to this document or is it merely ‘He said…I said…therefore…’
I think this is what we’re trying to arrive at here.
However, no one (on this forum or otherwise) has provided us with this information, nor admitted any" lack of information. " So we just go around in circles without any new info.
Supposedly a “CLF Union” exists in Hong Kong. But extrajoseph has stated that it is more a union of Hung Sing and Bak Sing practitioners and doesn’t include Chan Family representatives. It may have at one time but they all left or were ousted.
I have no way to verify this statement. I believe this statement by Joseph was what originally drew Dave Lacey into this discussion.
The major problem for someone like me to research this stuff is the language barrier. You native chinese speakers would probably get ****her.
because Sifu frank mccarthy and sifu dave lacey, k-no all have balls enough to step forward about this. if our elders weren’t backing us up does your silly ass seriously think we would talk **** and reveal ourselves as we have. no, we would hide behind alias’s and computer screens so we would be safe like yourself and slurpent/joseph and whoever joseph is on this forum.
thanks for your concern.
frank
oh, if the buk sing association excludes chan family members, then can you explain why the chan family’s master fu hang ng is featured in the malaysian hung sing kwoon’s celebration book?
isn’t master fu hang ng family of chan heung?
because Sifu frank mccarthy and sifu dave lacey, k-no all have balls enough to step forward about this.
You have balls because you put a name to your inane behavior?
if our elders weren’t backing us up does your silly ass seriously think we would talk **** and reveal ourselves as we have..
Yes. I highly doubt that you have any other authority as a spokes person other than from your sifu. Even that is questionable. Maybe I’ll call him up and ask him. What’s your Sifu’s phone number?
[QUOTE} no, we would hide behind alias’s and computer screens so we would be safe like yourself and slurpent/joseph and whoever joseph is on this forum [/QUOTE]
I’m not hiding from you Frank. One day we’ll meet. Only you won’t know it’s me until…wahahahahahaha
From the Hung Sing website:
"American Hung Sing Kwoon’s
“Club Creed”
1.I will honor and obey my Sefu.
2.I will respect my fellow classmates.
3.I will not intentionally bring dishonor, or negative attention to neither my school nor my Sefu.
4.I will not bully anyone weaker, or misuse my gung fu in any way.
5.I will protect those that cannot defend themselves.
6.I will train hard.
7.I will eat healthy.
8.I will not misuse drugs, or alcohol.
9.I will obey all laws.
10.My main purpose of learning martial arts is to build a strong body, mind, and spirit, and to be able to protect myself from harm. "
I think Frank’s behavior violates creeds 3, 4, and 9. I guess there is a different standard for him
Originally posted by yik-wah-tik oh, if the buk sing association excludes chan family members, then can you explain why the chan family’s master fu hang ng is featured in the malaysian hung sing kwoon’s celebration book?
isn’t master fu hang ng family of chan heung?
Frank,
Before you get a swollen head the size of a water mellon, anyone who was registered to attend the Malaysian meet in November got a honorary lifetime president certificate and anyone who sent in material (like Sifu Ng Fu Hang did) was featured in the Hung Sing Gwoon’s celebration book, so it was not a big deal.
Photos and certificates don’t mean much if there is no real respect for each other. You have caused enough stir in this forum already, why can’t you be less hot headed and behave yourself a bit better here, I can imagine Sifu Dino and your Sihengdai are quite embarassed by your behaviour but they are too kind to say so.
When did the chan family break the news about jeong yim being the founder of clf?
At the risk of getting involved in something I want no part of I just have to ask.
If Jeong yim founded choy li fut then why did he put the choy and the li names in the system? He did not train under Choy Fok or Lee yau san did he? He had to get that part from Chan Heung so no matter what the claims are out their Chan Heung will always be the root of clf.
Sorry if this angers anyone but I’m very curious about this aspect of the founder arguement.
The Chan Family have never said anything of the sort. You really need to read up on all the discussions before you ask any questions, but it is quite a task let me warn you.
It is primarily a few loudmouths (mainly American ones) trying to change history.
The Chan Family haven’t entered into the debate at all.
It’s just hard to understand…if Jeong Yim really founded CLF and if the figure GreenGrass monk really existed, then he should have founded a style called GreenGrass Pai or some other names other than Choyleefut. I don’t see why if Jeong Yim’s contribution to CLF is so great because of what he learned from ‘GreenGrass’ that he would not call his own style some other name.
I learned from all three branches before, so I am a neutral guy looking at the common sense of things here…
fu pow says " My feeling is that a majority of CLF sifus support the idea that Chan Heung is the founder of CLF and Jeong Yim was one of his disciples. It is a few rebel rousers that want to say otherwise. "
fu pow appreciate your reply in curtious manner, now if you don’t mind continuing, i find your comments interesting but still confusing.
what do you mean by 1) " MY FEELING " - 2) " MAJORITY OF CLF support the idea " and 3) " FEW REBEL ROUSERS "
what has feelings got to do with anything - who have you spoken too personally on this subject, etc ??
what do you call majority - many people?? - elders ?? how have you brought foundation to your statement ??
who are these rebel rousers?? can you give me all their names and their position and history within clf,and which eldes have come foward to dispute the claims now being made ??
just one more thing if you again don’ t mind - you have said -
" Whether Chan Heung’s teacher was the Green Grass Monk or the Charred Head Monk or Choy Fook or Too Wong Fu (thank you Julie Newmar) seems to me at this stage in the game kind of irrelevant."
if you think is it so irrelevant then why have you been so vocal and concerned about what is being said on a historical perspective ???
let us not forget also that the original name of CLF was not CLF it was fut gar jing chung, this is also found in early writtings even on the chan side and even down to 3rd and 4th generation players.
let us not forget also that the original name of CLF was not CLF it was fut gar jing chung, this is also found in early writtings even on the chan side and even down to 3rd and 4th generation players.
Before I answer your questions I would like to know how you obtained this information about the original name of CLF.
Originally posted by bean curd let us not forget also that the original name of CLF was not CLF it was fut gar jing chung, this is also found in early writtings even on the chan side and even down to 3rd and 4th generation players.
bean curd,
Could you give us an example of an early writing where it says CLF was not CLF it was fut gar jing chung? While you are at it, could you give us an example from the Chan side of 3rd and 4th generation as well?
Fut gar jing chung, as you know, means authentic Buddhist style and it is often used to praise someone who teaches a kung fu style derived from the Shaolin temple. Sometimes it is used to praise a style of Buddhist teaching as well.
If you turn the pages of a martial arts commemorative journal or walk into a traditional gwoon, you will find the phrase fut gar jing chung used for any Shaolin style, not just CLF. Any style derived from the Shaolin temple can be called fut gar jing chung, so how can it be the original name exclusively used for CLF?
Please give us some examples to support your assertion. Thanking you in advance and we look forward to your reply.
Western students are stupid. Eastern are much more stupid.
I explain:
Western kung fu practicioners are STUPID ENOUGH to keep old fights alive. We keep the thread on, and we keep the worst attitude we have in kung fu media: the fight between styles.
"Oh, Chen Style is NOT taijiquan at all (who said this: FU ZHENG YUAN)
“Oh, we are the only ones to know the REAL hotdog style” (every chinese master on earth)
“Ah, that guy bought his diploma”
“Hehe, his forms dont have this **** picking technique”
Aren’t your bored of all this rubbish?
I love my teacher, as you do. Anyway, everytime he critizices another school, I just hear this and I try to forget the tale as soon as possible.
I someday had the hope that western world kung fu guys could change this.
But we have learnt well. Not the movements, or in another word, only the mouth and tongue movements.
Peace
horacio
