It’s about to get live up in here…it’s about time too!
First of all, let’s get somethings straight.
I am not the only one (including the Elders from HSK’s from all around the world) that believe what I believe. So no, I’m not alone. Much of the information comes from some of our big name elders widely respected, so much that they could not afford to tarnish their name if they felt our history was BS.
I did not concoct the Green Grass Monk page on my own. The Information is directly from the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon and its elders. Not Me. There are thousands out there that believe our story.
Effectively prove me wrong or leave it alone. You Chan Lineage guys are always so fast to shoot me or any of the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon disciples down, [B]but no where have you ever proved me wrong[/B], because i haven’t changed my point of views yet. So what are you waiting for?
4) I have spent years contacting Hung Sing Kwoons from all around the world to get a grasp what others versions of the Fut San Lineage were out there and they are all the same. The only discrepancy I found was Jeong Yim did not get killed at a young age because he was around to teach CHan Ngau Sing in 1883.
For decades only the Chan Heung line published their version of the history. Now, when people from the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon come out and tell our story all the Chan Clan’s get ruffled feathers. You guys readily assume i am only one person with the belief that Jeong Yim was the co-founder if not the real founder of the Choy Lee Fut system. Regardless of what the forum may think of me, ourstory is being told by every single Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon in the world, so no, i don’t feel alone here. And no, i’m not a lone rogue.
If you don’t believe me, then contact the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon and email them at their website of: hongshengguan.com and check it out for yourself. In Fut San, my sifu is Lok Gee Hung, tell them i said hello.
Now, this is my challenge to you…
I beg you to prove me wrong beyond the shadow of a doubt. Teach me something!
Jeong Yim was co-founder of the CLF System
The Green Grass Monk is a major contributor to the Hung Sing Kwoon family, and to CLF.
Based on the information i have, prove me wrong that the Green Grass Monk never existed and is only folklore.
Why should i believe:
Chan Heung is the sole founder
Loong GeeChoy is not Jeong Yim
Chan Heung killed a tiger with his bare hands and come away unscathed.
Chan Heung kicks up boulders and breaks them with a single kick.
The Chan Heung version of our history is the only one.
Monk Choy fooks monesterial name is Ching CHo
I have to cut this short because i have a class to teach and i will be back and this is a good place to start.
You cannot establish fact by talking about Gee Sim, Nan Sil Lum, the 108 fighting monks at Nan Sil Lum, Ma Chat and the like. There is little evidence to support the existence of any of them, so how can they be used to support the existence of something else? You may as well throw in Ng Mui and Fong Sai Yuk for good measure.
No, I don’t really believe 3 + 4. However, they are indicative of a phenomena common in Chinese martial arts folklore. I accept this, but you seem to feel that your line’s history is somehow immune from “bigging up” their teachers or telling out and out porkies to attract students and deter challengers.
As for 5, I also accept that the truth is lost in the mists of time, and it is impossible for me to know the definitive truth. However, the Chan version has few holes, and academically if you alter things slightly in the face of new evidence it doesn’t make it a lie or a cover up. You will not see Chan students on the internet casting aspersions on the talent or character of Jeong yim, yet you have frequently done so about Chan Heung and the Chan family.
Frank, you are good at what you do, and you believe in what you do, and that’s great. However, don’t let your belief in what you do cloud your judgement and lead you into irrational bitterness. This endless sniping degrades us all.
This is the last I will say on this subject, ever. (as I’m probably already in trouble for this).
HSK,
Why don’t you answer Fu-pow’s question?
A dbate does not consist of answering questions with questions. It also does not consist of making personal attacks.
Where does your information come from? Your website if I’m not mistaken mentions Frank Yee’s Hung gar and some “elders”. If we follow the investigation, where does their information come from? Are you going to answer “by word of mouth”? In other words, folklore or heresay? Legend? Stories?
In that case how valid is your argument if all your “evidence” is based on other “claims” or arguments that are not supported by evidence?
It seems that you also have “changed” your “version” of your “history”.
Oh, we can’t say Jeong yim died young now because he must have taught Chan ghau sing and so he must have been around long enough to do that… Now isn’t that going to seem a bit too “convenient” to those who don’t buy your theories and claims?
I remember you making statements about people changing dates and ages etc etc but what proof can you give that your “elders” and sources did not change dates and lie? Because you said so?
Your article… green grass monk revealed to Jeong Yim he was Cai dezhong… again where is the evidence? Were you there? How more valid is your statement compared to someone writing “green grass monk revealed to Jeong Yim he was Fong sai Yuk”? or was it Wong Fei Hung or was it Ng Mui or jee sim or Leung Jan or Zhang Wuji??
Legend tends to get exaggerations but have a look at Yees descriptions of the dummies…were they expert engineers back then… why does exaggerations that come from others are exaggerations but those that come from you or your sources you consider “evidence” or “fact”?
By the way, where is that Pak pai mountain or whatever mountain on the real world map? There is Lau fau mountain but where are all these other locations you mention on the actual map?
If Choy Fook was green grass monk then Chan Heung and Jeong Yim could not have been class mates. By the time Jeong Yim even met Chan Heung and started to learn kung fu, Choy Fook should have passed away if I’m not mistaken…
If Choy fook was not green grass monk then green grass monk has likely nothing to do with CLF since CLF was established in 1836 by Chan Heung… Now when was Jeong Yim born and when did he meet Chan Heung?
Long ji cheung was a well known student of Chan Heung, in fact a senior student, what evidence do you have that they were the same person? Your speculations? What if someone says they think Jeong yim and wong fei hung was the same person?
Your reasoning style does not give very much credibility to your arguments, especially when you make comments like “all you changed was a finger” when comparing 2 forms of which both you do not know, and one you have not seen (Hung gar gung gee, wasn’t it?) By the way, you still haven’t answered where and when did you see the CLF Gung gee and performed by who?
The Jeong Yim kicked out of a Chan Village thing comes from a NOVEL.
There is no Chan village in existence today related to CLF, but there is King Mui village. There is Chen village for Taijiquan…
What’s this thing about big name elders widely respected, doesn’t other lineages have “big name elders widely respected” who don’t agree with your story?
In case people wanted to read,
this is the supposed Yee’s descriptions of dummies:The wooden dummy hall was erected in the Lohan Tung or Buddha hall. The eighteen wooden dummies purpose was to test the kung fu skill of potential graduates. The dummies names and movements were as follows:
Lohan Or Ga Yit:
When the student entered, this dummy was in a seated position holding a monk’s ornamental staff. As the student approached, the dummy swung the weapon toward the middle of the student’s body. If the student retreated, the dummy would close, swinging the weapon faster and faster until the rear wall was reached. The student in this case would have to either duck or jump over the weapon which would shatter the student’s bones if it connected. If the student avoided the blow, he was expected to kick the dummy over, defeating it. All of these dummies were activated by the pressure of the students weight on the floor. Also, defeating all the dummies was achieved similarly by knocking them over.
Lohan Or Lan Tor:
The dummy is seated with its hands together as if in prayer. The student is alternately punched and kicked by this dummy. The blows must not be directly blocked because contact with the dummy would result in broken bones. The student must avoid the blows and knock the dummy over.
Lohan Mook Jit Lin:
One foot of the dummy is on top of a lion with the other standing on the floor. This dummy tries to use a low sweeping kick to hit the student. Once it starts, the move is repeated, faster and faster while rushing toward the student. The correct response is to use a jumping kick to floor the dummy while avoiding the sweep at the same time.
Lohan Seh Lei Fut
This dummy stands holding a staff in the right hand and holding its left hand at the breast. It uses the staff to block the student 's path and attacks with the free hand. The student must lock the arm and sweep the dummy to down it.
Lohan Ah Lah Luet:
This dummy stands holding a begging bowl. It tires to slam the bowl on the student’s head. If the bowl land precisely, the student will be unable to easily removie it. Avoiding the initial attack is the most essential element in defeating the dummy.
Lohan Seui Pou Tai:
This dummy stands holding prayer beads. When approached, the dummy tries to hit the student in the abdomen. Suddenly, the beads are swung towards the student’s head. The second blow was designed to catch the student unaware as he was trying to stop the first blow.
Lohan Fu Lao La:
The dummy stands with a wine cup in its left hand. The dummy strikes with one hand using drunken style and then throws the cup at the student. The student must avoid these movements and immediately counter.
Lohan Ga Jim Ting:
As it is approached, the dummy stands erect. If the student comes close, the dummy uses a low kick against the student. The dummy must be kicked down before it can continue its attack which becomes faster and faster.
Lohan Fuk Law Lei:
The dummy stands in a bow and arrow stance facing the student. When the student comes into range, the dummy attacks with repeated thrust punches to the body. The student must sidestep to kick the dummy over.
Lohan Dat Mo:
The dummy is seated sideways holding a book. If the student tries to pass, the dummy throws a sidekick as the student goes by. If he can avoid the kick, the student must fell the dummy from behind.
Lohan Chung Haw:
The dummy stands holding a head sized temple bell. As the student approaches, the bell is thrown. The student must avoid the bell.
Lohan Jang Chan
The dummy sits facing the student holding a book next to a pile of stones. The student is shot with projectiles that shoot out of the head of the dummy. The difficulty is in trying to close in on the dummy while it shoots these projectiles.
Lohan Dou Shuen:
The dummy is holding a staff, but is making awkward, stupid looking movements. This is an attempt to lure the student into thinking that the dummy is not functioning properly. The student is attacked as soon as he attempts to go by. The student is expected to be able to avoid such surprise attacks.
Lohan Yan Lang:
The dummy stands looking at the ground. When the student stands on the proper part of the floor, the dummy will thrust its fingers towards the student’s eyes. Students failing this test did not graduate for obvious reasons.
Lohan Hung Lung Sau:
This dummy holds a shiny begging bowl. Suddenly, the student has a blinding light in his face. As soon as this happens, the dummy throws a barrage of blows. The key point is not to get blinded by the light reflected from the bowl. If the student is not blinded, the dummy may be kicked over relatively easily.
Fuk Fu Lohan:
The dummy stands on one foot on the back of a tiger. In one of it’s hands is a large ring. The dummy tries to put the ring over the student’s head while kicking him from below. The student must avoid the ring in order to not get kicked in the groin.
Lohan La Gum Luet:
The dummy stands holding a monk’s spade. The dummy charges while spinning the spade in a figure eight pattern. The student who had stopped was considered eligible for graduation.
The final step
The door to the hallway leading out of the Lohan La Gum Luet was blocked by a one hundred fifty pound urn containing hot coals with the mark of the tiger head/dragon body on the handles. The student had to hug the urn with their forearms. This branded him with the mark of a Sui Lam master. The highest experts had marks only on one arm, hainvg used one arm to lift the urn.
There were not much written records for you to use as evidence for your Jeong Yim claims? You seem to have found some very detailed written record (available on the internet) to support your dummies …Now wouldn’t these information be even more scarce? Jeong Yim if involved SECRETLY in revolutionaries activity so too dangerous with written records ( but can go around teaching and running a Hung Sing Gwoon), then wouldn’t it be even more dangerous to keep these outright anti-ching shaolin temple related information on dummies in written records?
You may not be the only one who holds the view you expressed but there is more than one who disagrees with your expressed view…so ??
The Futsan group, according to some sources, were actually critisized for their bad research. Didn’t someone on the forum post about a guy there getting jailed for fraud?
There are probably thousands who DON’T buy your story. So?
You may not be the only one who holds the view you expressed but there is more than one who disagrees with your expressed view…so ??
The Futsan group, according to some sources, were actually critisized for their bad research. Didn’t someone on the forum post about a guy there getting jailed for fraud?
There are probably thousands who DON’T buy your story. So?
Others can also tell you effectively prove the Chan Heung story wrong or just shut up.
Wo cares if you spent years collecting info from futsan schools and they are the same. They probably came from the same or related source.
What if someone collects the stories from all the chan lineages and they are all the same?
Oh, based on the movies and stories around, prove that Fong Sai Yuk did not exist and is only folklore… What about zhang wuji?
You and your Sifu, Sifu Salvatera, along with some others visited Futsan and Futsan HSK. If I’m not prying too much, what documents or artifacts did they reveal to you so confirm the Jeong Yim history. I’m sure they weren’t empty handed. In addition, has anyone checked through the historical records of King Mui, and/or Futsan for any info or references to eigher Jeong Yim or Chan Heung or some of the other names mentioned?
I understand the possibilities of records having been destroyed or lost, but it would seem that within less than 200 yrs that someone would have some concrete stuff.
Sifu Lau Bun lived to a fair old age, the history of the USA HSK was passed through him, so beyond him is really only 3 or 4 generations, perhaps even less since the beginning.
HSK,
Another thing… didn’t you say you rely on “word of mouth” for your research because there was not written records because it was dangerous with green grass monk and jeong yim involved in anti-ching activity… then you go on to say something like "choy fook cannot be green grass monk because choy fook had a scar on his head but there is no MENTION (written??) of such a NOTEWORTHY characteristic on the head of green grass monk therefore they can’t be the same person…
What kind of reasoning is that?
“There is no written records of this man… but he can’t be this other person because this other person has a scar, and there are no “records or mention” of this man having a scar…”
Guess where was it mentioned that Choy Fook had a scar on his head? Or do you know?
Several traditions in CMA can never be verified or proven. That’s the nature of the beast. We should respect the traditions of our teachers and the lineage as taught to us, but take it with a grain of salt.
I understand the “take it with a grain of salt” approach in regards to any hard to prove histories. But to a historian which Sifu McCarthy is of his kwoon, it is far more important than a grain of salt, even if it is only of personal importance or familial or implication of heirarchy. Whether selfish or not, it’s important if someone wants it to be, and obviously it is wanted to be.
A lot of people say just drop it, but new (old) information has become uncovered with time and research. Archeologists could have let the Brontosaurus just be called the Brontosaurus and be done with it, but over the last several years they found they were wrong on the original design of the beast and now call it Apatosaurus (sp?). Who cares? somebody did and now the change is the new standard.
Choy Lay Fut, for all that practice it and for some who don’t, is a treasure. Some don’t care who discovered the treasure, some do. There is great pride at stake even if some or alot of that pride is egotistical, it matters if it matters. know what I mean?
Sadly, Chinese martial art is a true Pandora Box, even it occurred yesterday; as we all know, there are many revisionist out there changing their resume to make themselves more legendary.
Therefore, we should acknowledge the oral-history of our particular style, but at the same time we should use modern form of documentation to create a historical framework, i.e., timeline, etc.; however, it will never really be totally accurate.
For example, Yue Fei; historically we know that he did exist and was a renowned general in the Southern Song Dynasty; however, we aren’t sure, if he is the true founder of numerous styles that identify him as their originator, e.g., yingzhaoquan, xinyiquan/xingyiquan, etc.; especially, that these styles recognition occurred centuries after Yue Fei assassinate.
Exactly my point. There are different versions out there and none have proof their version is true. Believe what you want and teach your students but its better not to push your history on others.
the death bed. before the moment of your ultimate transformation, you will know that you didn’t know, you were lying, you were telling the truth or your were following on someone elses word.
that’s all the closure anyone really needs.
seeking validation is what children do…and warmakers.
besides, your kungfu that is personally you is either good, excellent, not so good or completely sucking wind.
You come in naked, you leave the same way. so little time and people still argue about stuff that happened before they were born.
I have laid out my claims, so go ahead and prove me wrong. I don’t need to prove anything to you. Prove me wrong. do your best, i’m a strong guy, i can take it.
Is there any way to disprove my claims? Then Please do so. I welcome it.
As mulong said even the bible has so much controversy. he is right it will never have closure, but that doesn’t mean I am not telling our story. You cannot tear down anything with your own doubt, provide me with something to prove to me I am wrong, then I will openly apologize for any ignorance.
I don’t think any of you can disprove it? Until then take it with a grain of salt.
As i’ve said, try your best to disprove it.
if you think there is any real evidence about clf from the source, than you are mistaken.
I’m not part of this argument and I don’t have a beef with anyone but typically when someone is making claims, it is their burden to prove themselves right. Not the other way around.
Also, just because a thing can’t be proven wrong does not mean it’s fact. Einsteins theory of relativity can’t be proven wrong but it also can’t be proven right. That’s why it’s a theory.
Anyway, like I said, not my argument, no beef with anyone.
HSK,
You have ignored Fu-pow’s question.
You have also not addressed my questions and points. So you have no answer to those issues raised? Then isn’t that enough to shake the validityof your claims.
Its very easy to avoid proving anything by avoiding questions and then go on to say “prove me wrong”.
Similarly someone can say to you “prove yourself right, period.”
These flaws in your reasoning and the lack of evidence already says much about your claims. For example, mentioning a character in history to reside in a place that you cannot point to on a map says much already…and where is this chan village located? What province, county and district. What were the neighbouring villages? Where are they today? You don’t know?
Try answering this: How do you know Choy Fook had a scar on his head? Did you see it? Who told you or where is it mentioned?
Anyway to disprove your claims? Not too hard if you make mention of places that don’t exist and you claim a location that you cannot point to on a map… how’s that for a start?
Quote:“if you think there is any real evidence about clf from the source, than you are mistaken.”
Don’t you think with this statement you are putting your own foot in your mouth? No real evidence? Then what is it you are claiming? And what was this “research” you’ve done?
Let’s see how much research you have done… answer these questions if you can :
You say Chan Heung taught in chan village…do you know if the ancestral hall where he taught still stands today? Where was it located? What were the neighbouring villages?
If someone wants to bend this and that to fit their little model, its actually quite easy…eg. You say Choy Fook was on Mt Lau fou and green grass monk on some “pak pai” mountain ( ..or something like that)…therefore they can’t be the same person…but wait… “I THINK MT Lau fou and Pak Pai mountain are the same mountain…therefore they were at the same place…therefore they ARE the same person…”
NOW GO AHEAD AND PROVE THIS STATEMENT WRONG, PEROID. WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR? PROVE IF YOU CAN!
Does that style of reasoning sound familiar to you?
