Fight History

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
41

Joy the Cyber wing chun master!!

Yeun fen,
Congrats on 2052 post!! Man when do you train or teach? Or have you just been posting for that long? yeah but even so 2052!!!

on another note!

Joy wrote: precision is an instrumental value- its meaning depends on what one is precise about.

— Joy HFY has a precise method of preserving and defining what is a perfect Tan, Bong, fook etc.. and a criteria to test it. Do you? is yours even the same as your Sifu’s? and how do you know yours are at maximum effieciency if you do not have a precise method or a way to test it. Please give me a precise discription on a technique and how it can be passed down and tested. To disprove my point here.

Joy wrote: Shotokan folks are pretty consistent- I will take the diversities in
Yip Man’s and leung Jan and related wing chun over it any day.

— wow you seem to not be able to distinguish the differents between application and form. Yes the art must be consistent with the physical realities of the human body and 3D space and time. Diversities is gained through the proper control of these variables for every action the proper reaction. I hope you see what I mean here. I’m looking forward to #2053!!!

Chango (Saat geng sau)

:cool:

42

Hi Chango,

I’ll be the first to admit that my info on HFY is very limited (to personally seeing Garrett demonstrate HFY and listening to him lecture/answer questions; reading published materials; and speaking with WCK brothers that have attended HFY seminars). Personally, I don’t care much about it as I’m very satisfied with what I’m doing. If it provides what you are looking for, then I’m very happy for you. TN

You do need to understand, however, that if the VTM or HFY contends that HFY’s oral tradition (history) is factual as opposed to legend, that inevitably leads to the issue of proof (how do you know?). For me, and I’ll bet many others, appeals to “because Garrett Gee says so” (i.e., HFY oral tradition) doesn’t meet any criteria of reliability. Anyone can claim (and perhaps honestly believe themselves) to be related to George Washington. If they do, the next step is to find out with certainty who their father is, who that person’s father is, and so on all the way back to GW; we don’t rely on simply their say-so or their name dropping. Being able to point to some folks that actually existed in the past and calling them ancestors without being able to genuinely “connect the dots” doesn’t provide certainty either (anyone can do that). TN

Your suggestion that Garrett’s teacher, and I suppose any recent lineage of HFY, can’t be “researched” due to his status as a “secret agent” (and leaving aside for the moment the logic of that argument) puts HFY and the VTM in a quandry: how can you (or they) suggest the lineage is factually accurate when it can’t be – according to you – reliably proven? Any claim that can’t be proven can’t IMHO call itself “factual” or “true” (it may be true, it may be false – in either case, we don’t know). So, it comes back to accepting what Garrett says as true because he says so. Again, that may be fine for you; but you need to understand that it is not for some us. TN

You are correct that I can, for example, only “connect the dots” of my lineage with certainty as far back as Leung Jan. His claim of learning from WWB is corroborated to some degree by other lineages, unrelated to LJ, that claim WWB as their progenitor (and the similarity in what they do) and by other lineages that list WWB as a teacher of WCK on the Red Boats. Prior to that period, there is no corroboration or reliable evidence to support any “theory” (although there are many legends). I think this just shows, as Joy pointed out, the difficulty in proving WCK’s pre-Red Boat history if any. While we can trace back with certainty to the Red Boat many lineages of WCK, HFY hasn’t been able to even do that. And if that can’t be done, how can you take the next giant step of tracing it reliably (so that you can call it “fact” or “true”) all the way back to Shaolin? TN

And BTW, your syllogism of “Garrett says HFY is from Shaolin” and we practice Chan in HFY, and we know Chan comes from Shaolin, so this proves HFY comes from Shaolin is blatantly fallacious. TN

Terence

43

terence

Terence,

Sibok Chango does bring up some valid points. Earlier you pointed out some Wing Chun greats such as Wong Wah Bo and Leung Yi Tai, however, to date there is no verifiable proof that they ever existed. No historical documentation, no grave site(s), no personal items of theirs anywhere. Merely the oral passing of legends. I do not see how you can, with certainty, connect the dots. I’d like to know what proof you have, if any, which might prove the contrary. There is however, documented proof of Cheung Ng (Tan Sao Ng), which is in HFY history.

And BTW, your syllogism of “Garrett says HFY is from Shaolin” and we practice Chan in HFY, and we know Chan comes from Shaolin, so this proves HFY comes from Shaolin is blatantly fallacious. TN

Terence, to make the above statement as you did, is in its entireity - inaccurate. You have admitted to NOT understanding HFY. You do not have even a basis of knowledge to judge HFY, and therefore make such a statement. Your limited experience in HFY cannot take you to the level of expertise [on any level] on HFY which you seem to exude. You judge things without even knowing, and expect us to do the same to our own family? Unlike you, that is something I cannot do, and you still have not demonstrated an understanding of the nature of secret societies. Just because something (anything) is not known to you, does not mean it doesn’t exist. Hence, the reality/process of learning.

Regards,
-Savi.

44

Hopefully, This Post Will Not Be Erased???

Terence Wrote>

in all of the VTM’s “research”, including the thousands of travel miles logged, trips to China, visits to all these people, did they ever visit their si-gung in HFY? Since it seems that the HFY oral tradition is being presented as factual, don’t you think it makes sense to visit him (after all, certainly he can provide a great deal of info)? They visited Yip Man’s grave to pay their respects but not their si-gung in HFY to pay their respects?

Savi Wrote>

On a serious note, non-related to this thread Terence, and I will only address this once: I request that you do not take any of the HFY family members hostage in your arguments. I find it extremely disrespectful, and down-right immature. Your conduct is crossing the line of diplomacy. Leave Sitaigung Gee’s Sifu, and any persons of the HFY family out of your arguments.

Terence wrote>

I didn’t open this can of worms.

Chango Wrote>

Yeah and by the way who are your superiors?

Terence wrote>

You are correct that I can, for example, only “connect the dots” of my lineage with certainty as far back as Leung Jan.

Terence wrote>

I can – and I’ll bet most everyone else can too – in contrast, give you my sifu’s and sigung’s, Hawkins Cheung’s, phone number; Hawkins teacher was Yip Man and I can provide photos of Hawkins and Yip together, other Yip Man students that rememer him, etc

Terence, you’re able to connect the dots on the Yip Man side, what about the Gu Lao WCK:confused:

Now, I don’t think this is a flame in any way shape or form, the question I just asked is no different to what you(Terence) asked of the VTM;)

I’ll wait and see if this post is erased:)

Sheldon

45

(Yuanfen comments in brackets)

Chango sez:Joy HFY has a precise method of preserving and defining what is a perfect Tan, Bong, fook etc.. and a criteria to test it. Do you? is yours even the same as your Sifu’s? and how do you know yours are at maximum effieciency if you do not have a precise method or a way to test it. Please give me a precise discription on a technique and how it can be passed down and tested. To disprove my point here.

Chango- I dont have to give you anything. I generally by pass “true believers” and ideologues who just repeat the same things-in this case about the perfect tan. To get out of this boring rut you may wish to describe in
public language - what you are calling the perfect tan.

Good wishes in your own hitherto secret newly released art

My “imperfect” tan has been tested often enough.

46

Now,Wait A Minute!!!

wingchunalex Wrote>

I still believe that ng mui created wing chun kuen. in the way we do wing chun at my school it seems probable that w.c.k was created by a woman.

Why is it then that it seems there are a larger amount of Male WCK practioners than Female:confused:

wingchunalex Wrote>

softness- not meeting force with force. our blocks forcus on deflecting and redirecting attacks, never absorbing them.

I think you may find that’s across the board, not just WCK, have you ever READ the “Art Of War”:confused:

Sheldon

47

Thank you for your support 2053!

Hello Joy,
No you don’t have to do anything! but the lack of substance in your response says it all. no need to repeat that over and over huh? time for me to do my morning training. looking for 2054 maybe?!! :smiley:

48

Genuine interest

Originally posted by yuanfen
[B]Chango sez:Joy HFY has a precise method of preserving and defining what is a perfect Tan, Bong, fook etc.. and a criteria to test it. Do you? is yours even the same as your Sifu’s? and how do you know yours are at maximum effieciency if you do not have a precise method or a way to test it. Please give me a precise discription on a technique and how it can be passed down and tested. To disprove my point here.

Chango- I dont have to give you anything. I generally by pass “true believers” and ideologues who just repeat the same things…Good wishes in your own hitherto secret newly released art
[/B]

Sifu Chaudhuri,

I’d like to pose the same question my Sibok asked you. Perhaps you won’t perceive the question as hostile if I ask? I am quite interested in what is your answer. I think it’d be a great discussion.

Regards,
-Savi.

49

Yuanfen’s mum!

–Good wishes in your own hitherto secret newly released art–Yuanfen

**Are you talking about your Sifu Augustine Fong’s wooden dummy?

–My “imperfect” tan has been tested often enough–Yuanfen

**Please don’t make me laugh.

50

Yuanfen

Yuanfen says:

My “imperfect” tan has been tested often enough.

That it worked makes it perfect. Shouldn’t this be the criteria, everyone?

Tan Sau = palm up. A perfect Tan Sau would be a palm up deflection that stopped me getting hit. Idiots like me ‘have’ to keep it simple.

Geezer says:

Why is it then that it seems there are a larger amount of Male WCK practioners than Female

Hormones. As a rule, guys seem to like the idea of punching and kicking each other in the head. Most women would rather give it a miss :). I met a female kickboxer when I was working abroad, and I asked her why she did it. She said something to the effect of: “When you grew up you’d get into fights in the playground and punch. Girls just pull hair. I wanted to feel what it was like to be punched in the stomach and face.”

Despite the fact she was quite pretty and wearing red leather trousers, that girl kinda scared me :slight_smile:

51

I think I have seen what you see! can you say the same?

Hello Terence,

<snip> I’ll be the first to admit that my info on HFY is very limited (to personally seeing Garrett demonstrate HFY and listening to him lecture/answer questions; reading published materials; and speaking with WCK brothers that have attended HFY seminars). Personally, I don’t care much about it as I’m very satisfied with what I’m doing. If it provides what you are looking for, then I’m very happy for you. TN

This says it all. You have to be able to look outside your own world to see reality. Not Terence’s reality or the world according to Terence. Your cup is full. I can say that I have seen alot of what you are learning. You have seen very little of what I’m learning. Yet you are the one ready to step up and make judgements on your assumptions. All kiding aside maybe an open mind and a more insight is needed here on your part. I mean this sincerly just plan take the time and plan a trip. I will give you a weekend of my time. If not me someone from the VTM staff. If you find that you still have issues. No problem but atleast you will be coming from a informed point of view. Instead of hear-say or your own assumptions. :smiley:

<snip>You do need to understand, however, that if the VTM or HFY contends that HFY’s oral tradition (history) is factual as opposed to legend, that inevitably leads to the issue of proof (how do you know?). For me, and I’ll bet many others, appeals to “because Garrett Gee says so” (i.e., HFY oral tradition) doesn’t meet any criteria of reliability. Anyone can claim (and perhaps honestly believe themselves) to be related to George Washington. If they do, the next step is to find out with certainty who their father is, who that person’s father is, and so on all the way back to GW; we don’t rely on simply their say-so or their name dropping. Being able to point to some folks that actually existed in the past and calling them ancestors without being able to genuinely “connect the dots” doesn’t provide certainty either (anyone can do that). TN

–Terence allow me to say first that giving a family tree of a system is not “name dropping” as you call it. The subject of the post by Jeremy only brings to light the discoveries within the southern shaolin temple! Once again the VTM has up coming works to provide you and others with more information on history. You will have to wait Terence. You cannot offer reasonable answers to the facts that I listed before. Those facts are the things that we are discussing here. If you really want more information on HFY’s history you can call the VTM.

<snip> Your suggestion that Garrett’s teacher, and I suppose any recent lineage of HFY, can’t be “researched” due to his status as a “secret agent” (and leaving aside for the moment the logic of that argument) puts HFY and the VTM in a quandry: how can you (or they) suggest the lineage is factually accurate when it can’t be – according to you – reliably proven? Any claim that can’t be proven can’t IMHO call itself “factual” or “true” (it may be true, it may be false – in either case, we don’t know). So, it comes back to accepting what Garrett says as true because he says so. Again, that may be fine for you; but you need to understand that it is not for some us. TN

– are you reading this post? first of all the discussion is on the preredboat era! secondly if you knew more about HFY you will see that the art it’s self is the artifact. I know you will not understand this but those who have at least a base level understanding of HFY will know what I mean by this.

<snip> You are correct that I can, for example, only “connect the dots” of my lineage with certainty as far back as Leung Jan. His claim of learning from WWB is corroborated to some degree by other lineages, unrelated to LJ, that claim WWB as their progenitor (and the similarity in what they do) and by other lineages that list WWB as a teacher of WCK on the Red Boats. Prior to that period, there is no corroboration or reliable evidence to support any “theory” (although there are many legends). I think this just shows, as Joy pointed out, the difficulty in proving WCK’s pre-Red Boat history if any. While we can trace back with certainty to the Red Boat many lineages of WCK, HFY hasn’t been able to even do that. And if that can’t be done, how can you take the next giant step of tracing it reliably (so that you can call it “fact” or “true”) all the way back to Shaolin? TN

once again you don’t have enough information. Fact remains

  1. Cheung Ng did exits
  2. He was known as Tan sau ng
  3. HFY has a precise method of teaching proper time and space via Tan sau.
  4. The Hung fa ting has been discovered
  5. Hung fa ting is a intrigal part of HFY history

<snip>And BTW, your syllogism of “Garrett says HFY is from Shaolin” and we practice Chan in HFY, and we know Chan comes from Shaolin, so this proves HFY comes from Shaolin is blatantly fallacious. TN

– See Savi’s post above :slight_smile:

Chango (Saat geng sau)

52

Chango wrote:

This says it all. You have to be able to look outside your own world to see reality. Not Terence’s reality or the world according to Terence. Your cup is full. C

There is all kinds of nonsense in the world, and we filter that noise from genuine information based on our intelligence, knowledge, experience, etc. I’ve been doing WCK for as long as your sifu. I’ve looked (at Garrett), listened (to Garrett and others), and thought about HFY. At this time I don’t see the need to spend more valuable time investigating further when so far I’ve seen nothing to suggest that it would be profitable to me (perhaps it is to you, and if so great!). It’s not a case of a “cup being full” (otherwise I wouldn’t have spent the time that I have so far) but rather the case of choosing to spend what little, valuable time I have on what I think will provide me the most benefits. TN

I can say that I have seen alot of what you are learning. C

What, WCK? LOL! TN

– are you reading this post? first of all the discussion is on the preredboat era! secondly if you knew more about HFY you will see that the art it’s self is the artifact. I know you will not understand this but those who have at least a base level understanding of HFY will know what I mean by this C

Yes, the discussion is on the pre-Red Boat era. But how do you get to the pre-Red Boat era if you can’t even trace your lineage post Red Boat? There’s no point talking about how George Washington was your great ancestor and began some tradition in your family if you can’t even prove who your daddy was! And to suggest that HFY itself proves the lineage is rediculous. TN

once again you don’t have enough information. Fact remains

  1. Cheung Ng did exits
  2. He was known as Tan sau ng
  3. HFY has a precise method of teaching proper time and space via Tan sau.
  4. The Hung fa ting has been discovered
  5. Hung fa ting is a intrigal part of HFY history C

Without even going into how the above “facts” prove nothing, let’s assume for the sake of argument that they are all true. How do you get to Garrett being related (lineage) to Cheung Ng other than by his say so? George Washington existed too. If someone claims him as a relative, don’t they need to prove it (to be “true”)? TN

Terence

53

Hi Savi,

Savi wrote:

Sibok Chango does bring up some valid points. Earlier you pointed out some Wing Chun greats such as Wong Wah Bo and Leung Yi Tai, however, to date there is no verifiable proof that they ever existed. No historical documentation, no grave site(s), no personal items of theirs anywhere. Merely the oral passing of legends. I do not see how you can, with certainty, connect the dots. I’d like to know what proof you have, if any, which might prove the contrary. There is however, documented proof of Cheung Ng (Tan Sao Ng), which is in HFY history. Savi

I said that I can only “connect the dots” w/r/t my lineage to Leung Jan and perhaps arguably Wong Wah Bo. Prior to that, all we have is legend. I’ve no problem saying that (and I do say that). But the VTM and HFY are promoting their legend as factual history. That is the significant difference between us. And yes, Tan Sao Ng existed. And yes, he is part of HFY legend. But that in itself doesn’t prove all HFY history is accurate or that he was actually a HFY practitioner. What does proves that he was a HFY practitioner is being able to reliably trace a lineage from GG back to him. You can’t, however, reliably trace HFY past GG. (I could, for example, make up a lineage that includes the names of all kinds of genuine historical figures but unless I can prove a connection to them, it all remains unproven). TN

And BTW, your syllogism of “Garrett says HFY is from Shaolin” and we practice Chan in HFY, and we know Chan comes from Shaolin, so this proves HFY comes from Shaolin is blatantly fallacious. TN

Terence, to make the above statement as you did, is in its entireity - inaccurate. You have admitted to NOT understanding HFY. You do not have even a basis of knowledge to judge HFY, and therefore make such a statement. Your limited experience in HFY cannot take you to the level of expertise [on any level] on HFY which you seem to exude. You judge things without even knowing, and expect us to do the same to our own family? Unlike you, that is something I cannot do, and you still have not demonstrated an understanding of the nature of secret societies. Just because something (anything) is not known to you, does not mean it doesn’t exist. Hence, the reality/process of learning. Savi

Perhaps you should be more concerned with the rules of logic (which Chango routinely violates). You can’t use, for example, a claim as proof of its own validity. But anyway, FWIW, I don’t need to understand in its entirely many things to see problems in logic, flaws in “research”, recognize fluff from substance, etc. TN

I’m not trying to belittle GG or HFY or the VTM. But I take exception with anyone or any group that touts their oral tradition (history of WCK) as “factual” – suggesting that the rest of us should accept it as well – when they can’t even prove the most simplest of things. TN

Terence

Terence

54

Here you go.

Originally posted by t_niehoff
[B]Yes, the discussion is on the pre-Red Boat era. But how do you get to the pre-Red Boat era if you can’t even trace your lineage post Red Boat? TN

How do you get to Garrett being related (lineage) to Cheung Ng other than by his say so? George Washington existed too. If someone claims him as a relative, don’t they need to prove it (to be “true”)? TN

Terence [/B]

Terence,
No one said that we couldn’t trace the HFY roots Terence. You’re losing the forest for the trees.

Here’s another link. I did some research for you. Unfortunately, it comes from the same website you perceive as “fluff.” But should there be any other place in the world to have this info aside from the HFY family? No.

http://home.vtmuseum.org/genealogy/hung_fa_yi/family_tree.php

***Dare anybody ask you to prove your daddy is yours? How audacious is your behavior! I’d like a blood sample of yours and your father’s… Fed Ex’d to me, please. Then I can test yours and his for myself. Kidding yo. Kidding.

-Savi.

PS: Not interested in HFY Terence? Are you in the same Red Boat as Sifu Chaudhuri (no offense intended)?

55

Hello,

I know this is none of my business but since this is a public forum I will add my two cents!

Why not just locate Wang Ming sifu (or some of Garrette Gee sifu’s other classmates) and bring them over for a seminar or visit them in China? This is year 2003 and many arts that were at one time or another associated with the Secret Societies (or other private organizations) are out in the open and since HFY is now out in the open by its headmaster it cant be such a big deal.

My Kung Fu family used to be extremely private and if you were not a Koo Lo native would have had no chance of learning it but now we are more public and the grandmaster/village head is even found on video on the net. 50 years ago that would never had happened!

As for the historical debate? Well, lets start one generation back before we debate about 6 generations back. Either way it doesnt effect me (since I am a neutral party) but I thought this might be a good place to start and it can help satisfy some outsiders questions that keep getting asked of your clan. Well, thats enough out of me for this and perhaps we can all get past this WC family bickering. We are all WC and should work together to help each other develop/research.

Cheers,

56

Terence, This Is The Real World!!!

Terence, you should give a little, you can’t always take, take, TAKE!!!

Sheldon Wrote>

Terence, you’re able to connect the dots on the Yip Man side, what about the Gu Lao WCK

That was from a post by me on page 3, I’m a poet and I don’t know it, “to get trust you must give it”

Sheldon

57

Savi sez:PS: Not interested in HFY Terence? Are you in the same Red Boat as Sifu Chaudhuri (no offense intended)?

No offense taken- I havent checked the color of my boat lately
but I it floats fine- I dont need to board a leaky Hung FY boat.
Jim R refers to bickering- no bickering on my part anyways.
Ever so often the HFY folks push their wares. Bottom line in marketing-
its better to be talked about than not to be talked about..

58

Welcome Mr. Roselando!

You can definitely relate to our situation! That brings great relief to me that someone understands the nature of privacy. You have brought more light to this thread, are most welcomed here!

Terence,

Nothing can be proven over the internet. We can show you how things are done, have been done, and still you will say “It proves nothing!” We can show you our family tree, and you will say “Your ‘fluff’ is mere imaginary ‘research’ to which you ‘historians’ are forcing us to believe!” Is this not what has been going on?

You ask someone of the impossible. The only thing that can occur on the internet is the passing of information. That’s IT! Nothing can be proven over the internet other than the internet, and things of its nature work. Perhaps I am ill-informed and you can help me understand how to prove something over the internet? You want us to prove our roots? Would you like birth certificates? Blood samples? Photos prove nothing with respect to what you are asking. We’ve displayed our family tree online without restriction to the public. That’s all we can do.

Keep in mind a system based on Chan Philosophy is based on reality, not legends. The only thing that seperates us from the answers we require is time, and that will pass. Do not let disbelief and ill feelings feed your aprehension about the HFY family. We only share what we know, even if only on an individual basis. Please continue to look for future articles by the VTM staff.

Sifu Chaudhuri,

Your choice of words begin to insult me personally, but still I understand your position. Enough said. Our boat is just fine and has been floating for 350+ years without any alterations. Thank you.

-Savi.

59

Terence, you should give a little, you can’t always take, take, TAKE!!!

Sheldon Wrote>
quote:Terence, you’re able to connect the dots on the Yip Man side, what about the Gu Lao WCK

That was from a post by me on page 3, I’m a poet and I don’t know it, “to get trust you must give it”

Sheldon

Sheldon,

You are the lamp to lighten the Gu Lao (Koo Lo) WCK.

Where did Robert Chu’s Koo Lo WCK come from???

Is this Robert Chu’s world or the real world?

60

Sifu Chaudhuri,

Your choice of words begin to insult me personally, but still I understand your position. Enough said. Our boat is just fine and has been floating for 350+ years without any alterations. Thank you.

-Savi.

Savi,

Yuanfen has had been insulted the VTM, HFY and TWC families for a long time.

For the man who is without shame,

Impudent as a crow,

A vicious gossip…

Please stop calling him Sifu

Humm…