[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1100782]Sure we can learn from different people- Ip Man did and said so. But when listing a sifu- the old way was you list one sifu- your original one in a style.
But one of the pluses of the old way that is often lost is that you were thankful to the teachers along the way., i,e you thank those who were upstream before you.[/QUOTE]
This is essential info Joy, especially considering my own Sigung Lee Shing. He felt he ‘had to’ disregard his previous teachers in WCK to learn from Ip Man and from his first day he took Ip Man as his Sifu and Ip Man in turn took him as a student. Anything previous was simply wiped from the history books!
Today, much time is spent researching my Sigungs previous teachers but with all respects that is not neccessary. He was Ip Mans student, and that should be enough imho. I know that some, including me, promote his other learning as it’s quite obvious in the present generations that we hold other mainland flavour stuffs, but Ip Mans influence should not be overlooked.
And I wouldn’t say Lee Shing would have considered what he had done as a ‘Lineage Change’ either to be honest, because back then Wing Chun was all one family! One lineage.
Maybe we could learn more from the old days than we care to admit.
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1100876]This is essential info Joy, especially considering my own Sigung Lee Shing. He ‘had to’ disregard his previous teachers in WCK to learn from Ip Man and from his first day he took Ip Man as his Sifu and Ip Man in turn took him as a student. Anything previous was simply wiped from the history books!
Today, much time is spent researching my Sigungs previous teachers but with all respects that is not neccessary. He was Ip Mans student, and that should be enough imho. I know that some, including me, promote his other learning as it’s quite obvious in the present generations that we hold other mainland flavour stuffs, but Ip Mans influence should not be overlooked.
And I wouldn’t say Lee Shing would have considered what he had done as a ‘Lineage Change’ either to be honest, because back then Wing Chun was all one family! One lineage.
Maybe we could learn more from the old days than we care to admit.[/QUOTE]
Im curious Spencer, if “Anything previous was simply wiped from the history books!” and you adhere to this , why are you researching what Lee Shing did earlier?
Arent you contradicting the very thing youre trying to prove??
Personally, theres a hint of ethical superiority that creeps into the “one teacher” guys which i dont get… we’re not in 1930’s China now.
So ill ask you the question i asked Joy. Ive done 8 years mainland style (under one teacher) and more again with a TST teacher… if i put up a lineage chart for a prospective student should i leave one out??
[QUOTE=GlennR;1101126]
Personally, theres a hint of ethical superiority that creeps into the “one teacher” guys which i dont get… we’re not in 1930’s China now.
So ill ask you the question i asked Joy. Ive done 8 years mainland style (under one teacher) and more again with a TST teacher… if i put up a lineage chart for a prospective student should i leave one out??
No claim to superiority on my part Glenn. I am not peddling or advertising here…just chit chatting.The fact is that I have visited other schools and teachers and see no reason for sifu hopping. I am happy with the path that I have taken…Yuanfen and good fortune that I was living in Tucson in the 70s. If I was living somewhere else- there is a very good chance that I would be doing something else besides wing chun.
Glenn- I would not presume any right to tell you what you should tell your students.
But the fact is that the meaning of “lineage” has changed considerably over time.((Further-wing chun is NOT a community in any disciplined sense of the word and without much quality control)
Truth in labeling is always in season- helps honest people understand the background of a teacher… the equivalent of a contemporary academic vita perhaps.In major universities in the USA..inquiring students can look up the vita of their teachers if they want to. And fudging on a vita is a major no no.
If I were a wing chun student I would try to find out at least how long a potential teacher has studied and with whom and with what regularity. My take anyway…
[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1101134][QUOTE=GlennR;1101126]
Personally, theres a hint of ethical superiority that creeps into the “one teacher” guys which i dont get… we’re not in 1930’s China now.
So ill ask you the question i asked Joy. Ive done 8 years mainland style (under one teacher) and more again with a TST teacher… if i put up a lineage chart for a prospective student should i leave one out??
No claim to superiority on my part Glenn. I am not peddling or advertising here…just chit chatting.The fact is that I have visited other schools and teachers and see no reason for sifu hopping. I am happy with the path that I have taken…Yuanfen and good fortune that I was living in Tucson in the 70s. If I was living somewhere else- there is a very good chance that I would be doing something else besides wing chun.
Glenn- I would not presume any right to tell you what you should tell your students.
But the fact is that the meaning of “lineage” has changed considerably over time.((Further-wing chun is NOT a community in any disciplined sense of the word and without much quality control)
Truth in labeling is always in season- helps honest people understand the background of a teacher… the equivalent of a contemporary academic vita perhaps.In major universities in the USA..inquiring students can look up the vita of their teachers if they want to. And fudging on a vita is a major no no.
If I were a wing chun student I would try to find out at least how long a potential teacher has studied and with whom and with what regularity. My take anyway…
joy chaudhuri[/QUOTE]
Thanks Joy
I guess thats what im about… Truth in Labelling.
If you’ve studied say 20 years in total, yet only mention your first teacher (or last) isnt it being dishonest? Like it or not you have to acknowldege any major influences in your own learning
I mean, after all, YM himself claims two teachers… his 1st and then his second.
And when you llook at it, he actually gives LB the most cudos if the story is true
The virtues of loyalty are not to be underestimated. I’ve been with my current WC instructor for over 20 years, and I’m still in occasional contact and on good terms with my first ever teacher from 1977. He’s even a friend on Facebook
however, I view with distaste the notion that to take up with one instructor you have to disavow all previous. Why does it have to be either/or and not both/and? AS Glenn alluded, this isn’t a period drama.
No one person is the fount of all wisdom. Sane instructors realise this and encourage the student to become a proactive, initiative-using seeker of knowledge and skill, rather than a passive disciple working toward a “transmission” drip fed at the instructor’s discretion. The oft-heralded goal of the student surpassing the teacher ain’t going to happen under such arrangements.
Yip Man might have been a great WC exponent. Some of his outcomes as a teacher and manager of students IMO would be graded a B- at best, and that’s probably being kind.
Maybe we could learn more from the old days than we care to admit.
Perhaps, but as much about what to avoid as about what to do IMO.
Thanks Joy
I guess thats what im about… Truth in Labelling.
If you’ve studied say 20 years in total, yet only mention your first teacher (or last) isnt it being dishonest? Like it or not you have to acknowldege any major influences in your own learning
I mean, after all, YM himself claims two teachers… his 1st and then his second.
And when you llook at it, he actually gives LB the most cudos if the story is true
Glenn- I may be repeating myself. I see no problem in people listing who they learned from and I see no problem in someone learning from different teachers.But there are possible differences in value systems and cultures involved. Ip Man clearly told his top students and his sons that he first learned wing chun from Chan Wah Shun, then his sifu’s senior students and later from Leung Bik. Ip Man followed correctly the meaning of “sifu” in the martial culture of his time and listed his first teacher as his sifu. No dishonesty in that.
Re difference in values.. my sifu remains my sifu though I have learned things from others- some from other styles as well. That is based on my sense of values and it so happens also that what I have learned from my sifu more than holds it’s own compared to other exposures. The older term sifu is different from the more modern notion of a “coach”. I use the term sifu but understand when others use therm coach.
[QUOTE=GlennR;1101126]Im curious Spencer, if “Anything previous was simply wiped from the history books!” and you adhere to this , why are you researching what Lee Shing did earlier?
Arent you contradicting the very thing youre trying to prove??[/QUOTE]
Firstly, I’m not trying to prove anything about my Sigung. I just like to research and learn as much as I can about the man who brought Wing Chun to England
He was very loyal to Ip Man until his passing, and it was only much later that Lee Shings eldest students started to ask more questions about his personal Wing Chun journey. Because of this ‘alliance’ with Ip Man, the curriculums promoted were actually representative of “Wing Chun Pye” as a whole and not just a singular family. Lee Shing wasn’t teaching ‘Ip Man Wing Chun’ because that didn’t even exist at that time. He was simply teaching Wing Chun!
Later, once Ip Chun had taken over the HK operations the family started to promote Ip Man WCK and Lee Shings connection and promotions were left alone. It is still like this today.
How you promote your own family tree is up to you and who you want to credit/discredit is your choice too because, like you say, this isn’t 1930’s China. But FWIW my own Sifu will continue to be my only Sifu, even though I am researching and learning from others all the time But what I teach isn’t ‘his’ WCK or ‘Lee Shings’ or ‘Ip Mans’. Its not even mine!!
Thanks Joy
I guess thats what im about… Truth in Labelling.
If you’ve studied say 20 years in total, yet only mention your first teacher (or last) isnt it being dishonest? Like it or not you have to acknowldege any major influences in your own learning
I mean, after all, YM himself claims two teachers… his 1st and then his second.
And when you llook at it, he actually gives LB the most cudos if the story is true
Glenn- I may be repeating myself. I see no problem in people listing who they learned from and I see no problem in someone learning from different teachers.But there are possible differences in value systems and cultures involved. Ip Man clearly told his top students and his sons that he first learned wing chun from Chan Wah Shun, then his sifu’s senior students and later from Leung Bik. Ip Man followed correctly the meaning of “sifu” in the martial culture of his time and listed his first teacher as his sifu. No dishonesty in that.
Re difference in values.. my sifu remains my sifu though I have learned things from others- some from other styles as well. That is based on my sense of values and it so happens also that what I have learned from my sifu more than holds it’s own compared to other exposures. The older term sifu is different from the more modern notion of a “coach”. I use the term sifu but understand when others use therm coach.
joy chaudhuri[/QUOTE]
Yes, i understand the older notion of Sifu Joy, in fact i have no argument/problem/lack of understanding with it.
But see, from my angle i dont think YM was that hung up on it.
The fact that he openly tells students about the other people he learnt from, and indeed says he learnt a “better” version of Bik, throws the whole 1st Sifu thing out the window.
What he’s saying is… i learnt of one guy but later on found one that showed me more.
Personally, i think YM would have liked the term “Coach”
So you see Yip as the more tradiotional type Joy?
Whats your take on him?
One foot very much in the old world.Even in his social pictures he wears the traditional clothing
while his students don’t.An old time sifu who was brief and selective in providing information.Prone to some vices that were not uncommon among people of leisure in Fatshan. WSL had a couple of them too. Ip man had
a couple of additional ones. Polite in a Confucian way. Saddened by the behavior of some of his students when he got older. A Chinese nationalist to the core. A fighter for sure who didn’t brag about his fights. Didn’t have to.Probably killed a man when he was a law enforcer just before leaving the PRC. Even as a school boy beat up an Indian policeman (rightly so)in HK who was bullyinga Chinese boy. Somehat of a “distant” father. A survivor. Loyal to friends.A sense of chivalry–Victor Kan mentioned him hitting a man who was bullying a female on the street. Proud of his community. Ip Ching decribes a challenge match with a northern stylist in Fatshan. A Chinese girl I knew tells the story of Ip man going toa wealthy student’s(her friend’s father) house to teach him in the courtyard. Several visitors who knew karate challenged him. He smiled. They came kicking at him and he sent them flying.
Quick but wry sense of humor… once when asked whether he did any martial art- came the smile and the answer “A little HsingI”.
In spite of some weaknesses— an amazing man- a real sifu.
Probably would not give me the time of the day.
I have more impressions of him- but that’s enough.
[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1101598][QUOTE=GlennR;1101592]Yep… all conjecture
So you see Yip as the more tradiotional type Joy?
Whats your take on him?
One foot very much in the old world.Even in his social pictures he wears the traditional clothing
while his students don’t.An old time sifu who was brief and selective in providing information.Prone to some vices that were not uncommon among people of leisure in Fatshan. WSL had a couple of them too. Ip man had
a couple of additional ones. Polite in a Confucian way. Saddened by the behavior of some of his students when he got older. A Chinese nationalist to the core. A fighter for sure who didn’t brag about his fights. Didn’t have to.Probably killed a man when he was a law enforcer just before leaving the PRC. Even as a school boy beat up an Indian policeman (rightly so)in HK who was bullyinga Chinese boy. Somehat of a “distant” father. A survivor. Loyal to friends.A sense of chivalry–Victor Kan mentioned him hitting a man who was bullying a female on the street. Proud of his community. Ip Ching decribes a challenge match with a northern stylist in Fatshan. A Chinese girl I knew tells the story of Ip man going toa wealthy student’s(her friend’s father) house to teach him in the courtyard. Several visitors who knew karate challenged him. He smiled. They came kicking at him and he sent them flying.
Quick but wry sense of humor… once when asked whether he did any martial art- came the smile and the answer “A little HsingI”.
In spite of some weaknesses— an amazing man- a real sifu.
Probably would not give me the time of the day.
I have more impressions of him- but that’s enough.
[QUOTE=Vajramusti;1101598][QUOTE=GlennR;1101592]Yep… all conjecture
So you see Yip as the more tradiotional type Joy?
Whats your take on him?
One foot very much in the old world.Even in his social pictures he wears the traditional clothing
while his students don’t.An old time sifu who was brief and selective in providing information.Prone to some vices that were not uncommon among people of leisure in Fatshan. WSL had a couple of them too. Ip man had
a couple of additional ones. Polite in a Confucian way. Saddened by the behavior of some of his students when he got older. A Chinese nationalist to the core. A fighter for sure who didn’t brag about his fights. Didn’t have to.Probably killed a man when he was a law enforcer just before leaving the PRC. Even as a school boy beat up an Indian policeman (rightly so)in HK who was bullyinga Chinese boy. Somehat of a “distant” father. A survivor. Loyal to friends.A sense of chivalry–Victor Kan mentioned him hitting a man who was bullying a female on the street. Proud of his community. Ip Ching decribes a challenge match with a northern stylist in Fatshan. A Chinese girl I knew tells the story of Ip man going toa wealthy student’s(her friend’s father) house to teach him in the courtyard. Several visitors who knew karate challenged him. He smiled. They came kicking at him and he sent them flying.
Quick but wry sense of humor… once when asked whether he did any martial art- came the smile and the answer “A little HsingI”.
In spite of some weaknesses— an amazing man- a real sifu.
Probably would not give me the time of the day.
I have more impressions of him- but that’s enough.
[QUOTE=GlennR;1101568]The fact that he openly tells students about the other people he learnt from, and indeed says he learnt a “better” version of Bik, throws the whole 1st Sifu thing out the window.
What he’s saying is… i learnt of one guy but later on found one that showed me more.[/QUOTE]
Totally agreed.
My point was that I also consider Lee Shing had a very similar experience with his students; being Ip Mans representative but still passing on stories of his earlier teachings to his closest students.
[QUOTE=GlennR;1101568]Personally, i think YM would have liked the term “Coach” ;)[/QUOTE]
He did have the term I would imagine! You don’t just get to the position he had without knowing about the older ways.
I should try and dig out some of my old notes as I was taught at least 10 different terms mapping the progression from student to teacher
I started doing Moy Yat/Ip Man Wing Chun in 2002, achieved a black belt in 2004 (Was one of those 20+ hour a week dojo rats) and felt pretty good about it at the time, but always knew it was lacking. Had done a Jujitsu/Aikido mix style growing up and always felt WC was weak once I clinched/grabbed on to somebody. Similarly, sparring with karate and kickboxing folks led me to find some holes in the long range game too. (Primary being that IMO YM WC doesnt really have one). Got involved in some program at the same school (which I guess amounts to a lineage change?) that was mostly a mix of Krav Maga, Chi Sim and Taekwondo, but it didnt fly well once I tested it out against actual kung fu guys.
Fed up with school politics, jumped over to learning Yin Style Bagua for a while which was one of the best decisions I ever made. My coach, Ed Guerra, was one of the best coaches Ive had and the style had a lot to it.
In 2005 I met my current Sifu, Grandmaster Garrett Gee and really got to see real Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun. Once I saw it, I knew it was what I wanted and joined their long distance instructor program. I felt like the WC I had learned before was a candle before the sun in comparison. Decided to Bai Si to Hung Fa Yi in 2008, been a heck of a ride since then, but I wouldnt trade it for anything.
Only regrets I have are that I didnt find Hung Fa Yi sooner and having had to learn long distance for a lot of my training.
[QUOTE=Eric_H;1101799]For the matter of lineage change –
I started doing Moy Yat/Ip Man Wing Chun in 2002, achieved a “black belt” in 2004 (Was one of those 20+ hour a week dojo rats) and felt pretty good about it at the time, but always knew it was lacking. Had done a Jujitsu/Aikido mix style growing up and always felt WC was weak once I clinched/grabbed on to somebody. Similarly, sparring with karate and kickboxing folks led me to find some holes in the long range game too. (Primary being that IMO YM WC doesn’t really have one). Got involved in some program at the same school (which I guess amounts to a lineage change?) that was mostly a mix of Krav Maga, Chi Sim and Taekwondo, but it didn’t fly well once I tested it out against actual kung fu guys.
Fed up with school politics, jumped over to learning Yin Style Bagua for a while which was one of the best decisions I ever made. My coach, Ed Guerra, was one of the best coaches I’ve had and the style had a lot to it.
In 2005 I met my current Sifu, Grandmaster Garrett Gee and really got to see real Hung Fa Yi Wing Chun. Once I saw it, I knew it was what I wanted and joined their long distance instructor program. I felt like the WC I had learned before was a candle before the sun in comparison. Decided to Bai Si to Hung Fa Yi in 2008, been a heck of a ride since then, but I wouldn’t trade it for anything.
Only regrets I have are that I didn’t find Hung Fa Yi sooner and having had to learn long distance for a lot of my training.[/QUOTE]
Hey eric
Thanks.
Is there anything about your original WC training/style that you preffered?
GlennR
[QUOTE=Eric_H;1101988]Sad to say it, but no. There’s not a thing I learned in YM WC that Hung Fa Yi hasn’t had a better answer for so far.[/QUOTE]
Wow. Says quite a lot about your previous Sifus.
It is unfortunate that you didn’t find anything in your earlier training, but its cool that you like the HFY approach, although I do not know their ways. More Shaolin/Wudang (Jee Shim) based aren’t they? Sort of explains the vast difference imo but nothing I haven’t seen in the Wing Chun I learnt to be fair
[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;1102153]Wow. Says quite a lot about your previous Sifus.
It is unfortunate that you didn’t find anything in your earlier training, but its cool that you like the HFY approach, although I do not know their ways. More Shaolin/Wudang (Jee Shim) based aren’t they? Sort of explains the vast difference imo but nothing I haven’t seen in the Wing Chun I learnt to be fair[/QUOTE]Sifu Richard Loewenhagen, who is Eric’s and my Sifu in the Moy Yat lineage (and the HFY lineage), opened our eyes to HFYWCK. He taught us HFYWCK up until his retirement in 2007 where our Grandmaster Gee took over our direct training.
From what I have seen and experienced in HFYWCK and Chi Sim Kung Fu, I have to say the similarities are VERY few. HFYWCK’s structure concept is not used in Chi Sim (and vice versa). Mechanically, they are practically unrelated. Conceptually, there are a handful of things shared on a surface level. Many southern MA’s have things in common.
