Chan Kam-Fai and your account says Jeung Yim co-founded CLF, that is a Johnny-come-lately prefabrication that will split the CLF family into two, is this what you want? You lot are going down that track.
[QUOTE=hskwarrior;1084131]yeah it also helps to tell the truth. LOL right EJ? the truth will set you free LMAO
[SIZE=“3”][/SIZE]
Hung Wu is VERY connected to the Hung Mun.[/QUOTE]
Hung Mun was inspired by Hung Wu (Zhu Yuan-Zhang), so was Chan Heung when he named his ancestral school in King Mui Hung Sing (Hung the Sage), but that does not mean Hung Sing is connected to Hung Mun, instead it means CLF was inspired by the same cause as Hung Mun and that is to overturn the Qing and restore the Ming.
hey are bent to promote Jeung Yim as the co-founder of CLF for some strange reasons
It is your point of view that they are hell bent to promote him as such. guess what? long before i knew of them and went over the history as we knew it, i too came to the conclusion that Jeung Yim was a co-founder so to speak. why? because our history stated that jeung yim shared what he learned from monk ching cho with his former teacher (chan heung). by adding in some of ching cho’s material into what chan heung was teaching earned Jeung Yim the status of someone who has advanced the system.
Next you’re gonna say “show me some hard evidence” well…tell me this, why do we have the earliest stages of chan fam CLF and nothing else, while the later stages of chan fam CLF contains forms more like that which comes from Fut San Hung Sing? it’s because of jeung hung sing! thats why.
I find it funny that almost all traces of Jeung Yim are missing or possibly erased within King Mui lineage’s history. i know many of my hung sing brothers around the world have noticed that as well.
Hung Mun was inspired by Hung Wu (Zhu Yuan-Zhang), so was Chan Heung when he named his ancestral school in King Mui Hung Sing (Hung the Sage), but that does not mean Hung Sing is connected to Hung Mun, instead it means CLF was inspired by the same cause as Hung Mun and that is to overturn the Qing and restore the Ming.
What is the origin of “Fan Qing Fu Ming”? Was it used anywhere else and by whom?
I’ll give you a bonus, Fan Qing Fu Ming was the newer version of an older one used by the Hung Mun, or should i say the original version.
[QUOTE=hskwarrior;1084134]
The ONLY thing i’m believing from the Chan family history about Jeung Hung Sing is the fact that the two of them were in Hong Kong between 1864-1867, on the run from the government. I previously thought they met in King Mui but it was Hong Kong because it was even documented by Chan Heung that Jeung Hung Sing returned to Fut San to re-open is own schoo in 1867l. so, keep your chan yiu chi hung sing history. nice gung fu, history not so nice.
[SIZE=“4”] [/SIZE]:D:D:D
“”
Which Year was it joseph? 1851 or 1875? And if he was following Chan Heung at that time why did he take down the chan fam name and put his own up? LMAO LMAO LMAO x 10![/QUOTE]
Futsan changed their CLF history only in the last few years , as late as 1997, the current manager of Futsan Hung Sing Gwoon (Dang Kwong-Mun) said in the Guangzhou Daily, Jeung Yim took over from Chen Dian-Yuan who went blind. Futsan also changed the dates, but that is of secondary importance, if Jeung Yim co-founded CLF why was he sent to replace another teacher? He should have his own school to start with.
———19973231851
[QUOTE=hskwarrior;1084151]What is the origin of “Fan Qing Fu Ming”? Was it used anywhere else and by whom?
I’ll give you a bonus, Fan Qing Fu Ming was the newer version of an older one used by the Hung Mun, or should i say the original version.[/QUOTE]
Do your reseach properly, Freddy, “Fan Qing Fu Ming” has various origins and was used by many, not exclusive to Hung Mun:
Chan Kam-Fai and your account says Jeung Yim co-founded CLF, that is a Johnny-come-lately prefabrication that will split the CLF family into two, is this what you want? You lot are going down that track.
Actually, i think even if it WERE a prefabrication just to entertain your thought, there is other information out there that is far more damaging. still, i know you are basing your info off of Chan Yiu Chi’s account of the history which took place much later in his life.
I felt co-founder was the proper description in the past, but i’d settle with major contributor to the advancement of the system. there is a lot of writing out there that says around the 1860’s (same time jeung yim came back into the picture) that there was a sort of revamping of CLF.
If Jeung Yim had nothing to do with it, why is the idea of revamping CLF come into the picture? It’s a well known fact, even stated by the author of that article that it was because of Jeung Hung Sing that CLF got the recognition that it did.
[QUOTE=hskwarrior;1084150]
I find it funny that almost all traces of Jeung Yim are missing or possibly erased within King Mui lineage’s history. i know many of my hung sing brothers around the world have noticed that as well.[/QUOTE]
That is not true again, there are quite a few chapters written on Jeung Yim in Chan Family CLF history, you have to get hold of a copy to read them.
I’m talking about the use of it by the Hung Mun! Fan Qing Fu Ming wasn’t the original phrase. answer my question and don’t throw any at me to take the attention off of you!
That is not true again, there are quite a few chapters written on Jeung Yim in Chan Family CLF history, you have to get hold of a copy to read them.
and who wrote it? Chan Yiu Chi?
[QUOTE=hskwarrior;1084159]Actually, i think even if it WERE a prefabrication just to entertain your thought, there is other information out there that is far more damaging. still, i know you are basing your info off of Chan Yiu Chi’s account of the history which took place much later in his life.
I felt co-founder was the proper description in the past, but i’d settle with major contributor to the advancement of the system. there is a lot of writing out there that says around the 1860’s (same time jeung yim came back into the picture) that there was a sort of revamping of CLF.
If Jeung Yim had nothing to do with it, why is the idea of revamping CLF come into the picture? It’s a well known fact, even stated by the author of that article that it was because of Jeung Hung Sing that CLF got the recognition that it did.[/QUOTE]
There are a few major contributors, apart from Jeung Yim, to the advancement of the CLF system, non of them claimed to be a co-founder. That makes Chan Kam-Fai and his Sifu’s claim divisive.
Frank…why do you feel Chan Yiu Chi had some hidden agenda against Jeurng Yim?If anything there are some out there no with hidden agendas (not referring to you :p).
I mean back then they all intermingled and traded kung fu. If one of your si baks or si suks excelled at a certain aspect of the art you could go and learn. This was a fairly common practice. CLF was definately not as divided as it is today. So many people are trying to jockey for position and for what? What does it get you…nothing. The only thing people care about and respect is how good ones kung fu is. Nobody cares who the so-called leader of CLF is because there isn’t one.
[QUOTE=hskwarrior;1084163]and who wrote it? Chan Yiu Chi?[/QUOTE]
Can you find anything earlier than Chan Yiu-Chi said otherwise? He re-edited his family’s records but some of the originals are still around but you have to ask Chen Yong-Fa and King Mui on that.
[QUOTE=hskwarrior;1084162]I’m talking about the use of it by the Hung Mun! Fan Qing Fu Ming wasn’t the original phrase. answer my question and don’t throw any at me to take the attention off of you![/QUOTE]
“Fan Qing Fu Ming wasn’t the original phrase.” What has that got to do with our discussion?
[QUOTE=hskwarrior;1084159]
I felt co-founder was the proper description in the past, but i’d settle with major contributor to the advancement of the system. there is a lot of writing out there that says around the 1860’s (same time jeung yim came back into the picture) that there was a sort of revamping of CLF.
If Jeung Yim had nothing to do with it, why is the idea of revamping CLF come into the picture? It’s a well known fact, even stated by the author of that article that it was because of Jeung Hung Sing that CLF got the recognition that it did.[/QUOTE]
Revamping CLF goes on all the time, it is a living tradition, but non of these pioneers claimed to be a co-founder of CLF, except Chan Kan-Fai and his Sifu using Futsan to launch this hideous claim to divide the CLF family, you are just a non-thinking foot-soldier, Freddy.
There are a few major contributors, apart from Jeung Yim, to the advancement of the CLF system, non of them claimed to be a co-founder. That makes Chan Kam-Fai and his Sifu’s claim divisive.
Actually this is the one true thing i’ve heard you say since i’ve known you. CLF students are lead to believe that Chan Heung was responsible for creating every form under his lineage prior to his death. the truth of that is, many of his students created forms and were shared amongst all of their affiliate schools. so NO, chan heung didn’t create every form in his lineage.
Divisive… incisive. who knows? Within Chan Heung’s direct lineage they can all input new forms, but Jeung Hung Sing added in the gung fu from Ching Cho…REVAMPING CLF…as a result, in King Mui you had CLF as developed by Chan Heung and since Jeung Hung Sing never completed CLF under Chan Heung and just learned the basics his CLF was being mixed with the Fut Gar, the only system he completed, which developed a new type of CLF, therefore, since Jeung Yim was the founder of this NEW type of CLF he can be considered a co-founder.
Then don’t call it CLF, call it Fut Yim if you like. He never finished his CLF (according to you). LOL.
Revamping CLF goes on all the time, it is a living tradition, but non of these pioneers claimed to be a co-founder of CLF, except Chan Kan-Fai and his Sifu using Futsan to launch this hideous claim to divide the CLF family, you are just a non-thinking foot-soldier, Freddy.
Maybe, if there was some bad blood the third generation, that’s not my issue. yet, long before all of that took place, Lau Buns school was already well established and since Jeung Hung Sing was his sigung, he knew our history as well. Some years prior to my sigung passing, he confirmed the history as i’ve written.
All i know is, there is bad blood someone where between our lineages. I’ve actually seen some really rediculous things written from the Chan side of the tree about jeung yim which left me saying WTF to myself. there is too much hullabaloo going on. period between sides.
Then don’t call it CLF, call it Fut Yim if you like. He never finished his CLF (according to you). LOL.
We Don’t call it Choy Lee Fut. We DO call it “Hung Sing Choy Lee Fut” as in created by Jeung Hung Sing. We also have the short hand name of Hung Sing Kuen we use as well.
Can you explain why we don’t practice any Chan Family forms? The Qi Gong Forms? or even share anything remotely similar other than the seeds of the chan heung’s system?
Exactly what is so “revamped” comparing the CLF from Chan Hueng’s line to Jeurng Yim’s?