So You Want A Debate, Huh?

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Southern Chinese Kung Fu
21

Let’s get somethings straight…

First, I am not, nor have I ever claimed to the authority on the history of my lineage. Nor do I claim to be an official historian. I don’t have a degree, nor do I need one. I have researched everything I can get my hands on so far. Master Leung Wai Wing of the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon is a member of the Communist Government in China and has access to various types of information dating way back. He has helped to research our history extensively and nothing about our version has changed since.

I’ve contacted many Hung Sing Kwoons around the world to compare notes and to see if there is anything new to learn. If I wasn’t so involved in researching the history everyone one in the Hung Sing lineage would still believe Jeong Yim died at about 34 years old. However, Jeong lived lived until 1893 and taught Chan Ngau Sing in 1883. So Jeong Yim couldn’t have died young. No one thought to check a little deeper. But my sifu and I realized that story was wrong by back dating Chan Ngau Sings date of death, and date of birth. Simple stuff.

Every Single Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon members from around the world all believe our story. Most of you guys who are trying to debunct my account have no connection to china, have no chinatowns, no real interaction with large groups of chinese like maybe new york, or even san francisco who has the biggest chinatown in the united states. But, i am connected to chinatown, china, and what not, so if you think I don’t try to prove what I have reseached wrong, then you are the ones wrong. I’m not gullable in the least, and most of don’t know me so you can’t judge me.

I never claimed I was doing some financially backed research expedition, there will be no media or cameras, no big head lines, no book signings no Heraldo Rivera finding the Green Grass Monks skeleton. I’m no scholar, I’m not a professional researcher, but because I wanted to know our history I went on a quest, and this is the result so far of my quest.

I have presented my material to the elders of the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon and got their approval. So I have no need to argue the point with you guys. It is what it is, and if you find it completely absurd, then move on–it’s just a joke, right?

What I have done here on this forum is introduce the Hung Sing Choy Lee Fut version of the history. Not HSKwarrior’s version, not GM Dino’s Version, not slick willie the pimps version. NO! The version I have shared with you on our history is the version of ALL Hung Sing Kwoons. [B]Each and every single one of them!!!
Why do you think i won’t back down from my point of view. And all of you think it is only my opinion. That, right there, is the funniest part of it all.

As long as all of the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoons around the world share the exact point of views as I do, I feel then, it is up to you to prove the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon’s version of the history wrong. Singapore, Hong Kong, Malaysia, USA, Macau, Phillipines, China, all the Hung Sing Kwoon and Buk Sing Kwoons all believe the exact same, no different, the exact same story about Jeong Yim, and the Green Grass Monk.

With some many well respected masters and students all backing up our version of how the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon was established as well as Choy Lee Fut, I pretty much feel that if you disagree with our version of “our history” then it is on your shoulders to prove me wrong. Now, see I know you can’t prove it wrong, so once again if you wish, go ahead and prove me wrong.

I know none of you guys have ever researched what the times were like and spoke to people who have actually live through them. You don’t know anything about what it was like back then because if you did then you would know that secrecy was paramount in those days. Why? Maybe you should do some research and find out for your self. Here, I’ll lend you and hand and you can start there.

This is the book that names Cai DeZhong (Tshai Teh Chung) or Choy DakJung. let me know if you’ve ever seen or read it.

“The Hung Society or the Heaven, earth and Man Society”

The book was first Printed in 1885 London England, has 3 volumes and was authored by JSM Ward and WG Earling. The book was published less than a hundred years after the passing of Cai DeZhong.

On page 14 of the book it lists Tshai Teh Chung as one of 5 ancestors, and the head chief founder of the Hung Society.

The Hung Society isn’t a myth or a Shaw Brothers creation. It is indeed very real and the father of many other triads to come. The Hung Society also known as the Heaven Earth and Man society names one of their leaders Cai DeZhong also known as the Green Grass Monk, one of Jeong Hung Sings teachers.

If you feel that is incorrect, then “Prove it wrong”!

According to all of our HSK elders around the world, Jeong Yim is at least the co-founder of CLF if not more. If you can’t swallow that, Prove It Wrong!

I have proven by showing you the characters used by Jeong Yim when Monk Ching Cho had him change his name, to the characters used to cover up the name because it was connected to an infamous revolutionary organization called the Hung Mun. Then I proved the Chan Clans theory that Chan Heung used the Hung Sing name first to be wrong by showing that the characters he used were only half-similar in name to that of Jeong Yim’s name, but not the same. Another falsehood which came from the chan clan.

Yes, with as little information as there is on choy fook, the fact that he died on a totally different mountain than did the “Green Grass Monk” who died in the ShaJian Temple in kwangxi proves that they are not one and the same. If they are then prove it to me.

As i’ve been trying to convey to you all that i have no personal stakes in the history, i’m not making any money, or intend to. I’m only spreading the version of our history that has been passed down to us from our elders. So if you are from another branch other than the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon, tell me why in the world would i listen to you?

What i wrote is not an academic paper. No science expeditions. I am only retelling our version, and then you say we’re or I’m wrong because it doesn’t mesh its not our-the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon’s- business. Our story is “OUR STORY”

So in ending, all I have to say is if you are going to speak up, don’t just pop off at the gums, do something to prove me wrong. I’d daring you to prove me wrong beyond the shadow of a doubt, and if you do i will publicly acknowledge that so and so actually taught me something.

Until then, like I said…Prove it wrong!

22

[b]Answer THIS question:

“Why do you want to spread YOUR version of history when you admit that it is only partially true?”[/b]

23

:smiley: don’t tempt me, I may easily prove you wrong. i do have those connections in southern chjna and i can have a map sent over to me. in fact even the general Dave Lacey’s website mentions that his friend has shown his where the Pak Pai Mountain is. and if i can show you that there is still a Mt Lau Fu, will you shut the Fock up?

As far as I know the chan ancestral hall is still there. if not the one i have seen, then i have seen the one that some of the chan students have erected a monument in the hall.

In king mui, chan heung lived in a village where everyone in the village had the same last name of chan. if thats not a chan village then what do i tell ya?

kirbyfist wants me to prove it, but i’m not going to teach you a damm thing, go and research it for your self. learn something. but i still say “You Prove it!”
I don’t have to prove it, at all. I am not asking you guys to accept or believe it, that doesn’t matter, what does is all Fut San Hung Sing Kwoons believe it.
You are not Hung Sing people, so who are you to say that the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon’s history is wrong? Who the Fock are you? Say something! What authority do you have in telling me our story is wrong and theirs is right? What are you waiting for :eek:

None, none at all. Believe what you want, but i will never change my mind until one of you can come up with some real proof that our story is complete garbage.
Don’t just talk about it, prove it wrong. You know why you won’t, because you can’t! I would put money on the table and bet you could NEVER it wrong. So most of you who hate the Hung Sing History can bithc and complain all you want. if you want to prove me wrong get off of your arses and prove me wrong. Saying that i have no real proof and my thoughts are contradictive, and such…You still can’t prove me wrong.

I know, its a little hard to swallow, but…You can’t prove me wrong…and oh, by the way…I got some good news…I just save a whole lot of money on car insurance. :smiley:

24

how is it partially true…

point out the parts that are only partially true and show me how they are only partially true. don’t just give me your opinion, how you feel, what you think about how it is only partially true, prove me where i am wrong.

25

Your asking me to prove something that has nothing to do with what I asked you , in fact it was YOU that said…

and

So the best we can do is spread the history as it was handed down to us.

And then I asked you a direct question about that statement…hence, again…

Answer THIS question:

“Why do you want to spread YOUR version of history when you admit that it is only partially true?”

26

  1. There is a difference between identifying a mountain and what it has been known as etc and actually pointing to any mountain in kwangsi and calling it Pak pai mountain. If it was known as that or had its name changed there should be some evidence.Did you know that they can still locate some ancient capitals of some of china’s dynasties, where they were and what they are now known as?
    You won’t get away with pointing to any mountain and say its “pak pai” mountain or the general or so and so has a friend who said knows a “pak pai” mountain…

  2. So green grass monk was a rebel in secret society such that there is no record of it in china yet this supposedly secret person in a secret society has his occupation and REAL name/identity REVEALED in a book PUBLISHED IN ENGLAND ?
    Tell me who sounds more ridiculous?

  3. If everybody in King Mui village had a surname chan, then that would be easily investigated… but remember it only takes one villager whose surname is NOT CHAN to PROVE YOU WRONG!

  4. Similar question can be asked of you: YOU think Long chi choy is Jeong Yim?
    PROVE IT! Don’t tell me something like shakira and Madonna are both blonde, female and sing …therefore they must be the same person…

  5. You still have not answered who told you or where does it mention that Choy Fook had a scar on his head? You didn’t see it did you?

  6. When we ask where is YOUR evidence, we mean YOU…why do you tell us things like so and so has a friend who is suppose to know… this is telling us that you don’t have the evidence or you don’t know,

7)Contradictions in your claims and arguments is not enough to prove you wrong?? You can chant on and on “prove me wrong” till the cows come home… but your talk is already doing that for you…

  1. Lets have a look at some of your claims… YOU THINK long chi choy is Jeong Yim…now lets see
    i) Long ji choy was well-known as a senior student of Chan Heung, one of the inner door students and was close to Chan Heung’s family… he was an early student of Chan Heung…now if there was a chan village or you think king mui is all chan surname people… how do you think Long chi choy whose surname is not chan managed to learn from Chan Heung, become a senior student and stay close to the family?
    ii) If Long chi choy was NOT Jeong yim, then this PROVES YOU WRONG that all king mui guys are surnamed chan and outsiders (Long chi choy whose surname was not chan) were NOT TAUGHT…
    iii) If Long Ji choy WAS Jeong Yim as you claim, then this also PROVES YOU WRONG because long chi choy not only was taught CLF, he became a senior student and a well-known student of Chan Heung…not the guy you claim kicked out of a chan village and had to go find a green grass monk to learn…

  2. Who cares if all your futsan guys agree with you, the other lineages might all agree with the Chan Heung group…So?

Now, Your PROVEN WRONG!!

27

Another thing, if YOU ask people who claim Choy Fook and green grass monk are the same person to PROVE IT.
Shouldn’t we be able to ask YOU who claim Long chi choy and Jeong Yim are the same person to PROVE IT ?

YOU ask others to PROVE YOU WRONG that Choy Fook and green grass monk are different people, couldn’t others ask YOU to PROVE WRONG the claim that Long chi choy and Jeong yim are two different people?

Another thing King Mui is King Mui, since when did it became known as chan village? Because you said so or you thought?

28

Oh, and I asked you about Pak pai mountain, didn’t I? I did not ask you about Mt. Lau fou. Your research seems a bit weak if you use as evidence :“even the general Dave Lacey’s website mentions that his friend has shown his where the Pak Pai Mountain is”.
That is used as your evidence? A ( passing?) mention in a website where a guy says a friend showed him this or that?

29

I just want to jump in here for a minute:

Not that I’m agreeing or disagreeing with anyone, but:

My Sifu, Chan Tai-San, died last year and was 91 years old. He studied CLF since he was 13. He shared a lot of history with me and he was closer to the founder(s) than anyone you guys have most likely ever met. I’m actually 4th generation, not including the founder(s). I’m not saying this to totally impress you, but to impress upon you that storied DO change from generation to generation.

My Sifu informed me that the current stories about the forming of CLF are a little off (in his opinion) Some of the dates don’t seem to make any sense whatsoever. He never bashed anyone’s beliefs, but he did say that there was a lot more to the history than the one DFW mentions in his book.

I think it’s important to have a history to your style. I think it’s also imortant to be open minded to what exactly IS your style’s history. In researching our other main style, Lama Pai, my classmates and I made several HUGE blunders when we first documented parts of it’s history. 17 years later we came upon new info from other sources that helped us paint truer picture.

I think it’s a good idea to question CLF history/folklore. I think we could probably throw our many stories regarding it’s history based un common sense alone. If everyone discusses and does not argue, maybe we can all learn something from each other.

Be slaves to the truth, not just what you have been taught to believe.

You know, no one wants to believe that their teachers were wrong about the history. Don’t feel bad if they were, rejoice in the fact that you might get closer to the truth.

Just like many of you think that all CLF is the same and that you all learned the best version of it, and your teachers was great/the best. Without opening up a can of worms, all CLF is definatly not the same. Many techniques of today have been eroded and changed from their original shape. It’s like the biggest game of telephone.

BY THE WAY:
HSK, a few of the Chinese names you use are being written with mandarin pronounciations, some Cantonese. If you could, try to get the mandarin one’s in Cantonese and I think it will be easier to explain your lineage. Or at least easier to recognize if people in my lineage match people in your lineage. Just a thought…

30

Oh, and this statement here:"What i wrote is not an academic paper. No science expeditions. I am only retelling our version, and then you say we’re or I’m wrong because it doesn’t mesh its not our-the Fut San Hung Sing Kwoon’s- business. Our story is “OUR STORY” "

Are you saying that your “history” doesn’t have to make sense because its YOUR STORY? Therefore it does not matter if there is discrepancies with evidence? It does not need evidence to support it? Are you admitting that “YOUR HISTORY” is nothing more than heresay and legend and talk? If so, wouldn’t it be more appropriate to be called MYTH?

31

Kennyfist, you’re a nut. i don’t know if you read correctly. You are no clf guy so why are you involved in this?

If you were choy lee fut then you would somewhat know the hung sing version of the history. if you don’t…hit the net and do some searching. Um…when i speak of “my fut san guys” as you put it, i am not talking about just in the city fut san. i am speaking for every single hung sing kwoon around the world.

If you knew our story you would know that as Jeong Yim passed on his information to his students, he began to learn gung fu from chan heung when he was 12. He was wanted for conscription and needed a place to stay. According to our branch, not the chan branch, but our hung sing branch, jeong yim was the only outsider under Chan Heung. if Loong Gee Choy existed when he arrived, then that would have been mentioned along with the history.

Jeong Yim needed to hide from the government, so it is possible that chan heung changed jeong yims name to loong gee choy to disguise jeong yim. it was a very common thing then to possess different names to avoid prosecution because getting caught could mean instant death. but i guess im just making that up too.

Choy fook had a nickname of Lan Tau Fook which means scarred head fOOK (roughly). Ching cho did not. No real confirmation if Choy Fook was involved in the revolution, but ching cho is one of the five ancestors.

#6----what the fock are you talking about? You kind of remind me of the guy with the long ass name. that nutty arse dude.

#7—I haven’t talked yet. go do a search for Choy DakJung or Cai DeZhong. see what you come up with

i, ii, iii-----you’re not clf and if you are, i’m sorry bro. its not your fault.

32

oh yeah

where did i hear that choy fook had a scarred head, from the chan fam fool! WHATYA GOTTA SAY NOW!

come with something good man. this is so easy peasy to me. YOU CAN NEVER PROVE ME WRONG, EVER! HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

SHOW ME YOU KNOW SOMETHING AND PROVE ME WRONG.

33

Frank…I have some old questions

I don’t really follow the lineage debates much BUT I do have some old questions I had ask previously to a student of Lacey (or at least that is what he claimed) he seemed to respect my manner and found my questions intriguing. He told me that he would ask his sifu but I never got a response from him…unforunately.

Some of the points no longer matter to your version since there have been change since 3 years ago…BUT I feel some of my points are still valid and I would just like to bring them up.

All I ask is for consideration since I offer no proof as well:

QUOTE: My post from old thread
"I took a look at Sifu Lacey’s site and his interpretation of the history. There are certain things that I have noticed in the past after reading so many different stories trying to promote Cheung Hung Sing as co-founder.

  1. They seem to always ignore Chan Yuen Wu involvement with Chan Hueng. Especially since it was Chan Yuen Wu that taught Chan Hueng Fut Ga Kuen.

  2. Choy Fook did not teach Choy Ga Kuen. I am not sure if style of Choy Ga is around but if it is then I am sure we could get some more info from them.

  3. Though not in all the cases they encourage the “Chan clan” theory even though there was documented history of students outside of this clan.

4) When ever a style is created rarely if even at all would there be known to have more than one creator. In general when a style is created it is usually based on the belief of the one. Any more would create conflict.

5) Therefore even if Ching Cho Monk exists Chan Hueng has already created his style, and therefore Choy Lay Fut. Why would Chueng Hung Sing want to get in on what his Sifu has kindly and graciously has worked so hard on? Once he is his teacher forever will he be. Never would Cheung Hung Sing be willing to accept a Co-founding title.

6) Chan Family is documented. Compared to word of mouth is likely be more believed especially in cases where the truth is hard to be found.

  1. Only the Hung Sing lineage have been publicly aggressive with their history.

I am not saying what is true or not since it isn’t possible. But like Fu-pow has said here (or else where) much belief must be suspended in order to accept the co-founder theory.

My points from 1 to 5 ties into a belief that Chan Yuen Wu is ignored in order to make room for Ching Cho and Cheung Yim’s connection, and is assuming he is willing to take co-founder credit.

Thanks for reading!"
END QUOTE: 06-12-2002 09:37 AM

I have highlighted the points that in my opinion still apply so please reply to those ONLY.

Alas if Chan Heung taught Jeung Yim and Jeung Yim took that and learned more and further developed it…etc etc…it would be considered a different style or merely additions to the style Jeung Yim teaches.

So either it’s a brand new style or the same old style with his own experience and knowledge attached and passed on.

Because ultimately Chan Heung is Jeung Yim’s Sifu and you follow person not the style, Chan Heung is SiGung to students of Jeung Yim ill regardless since they are students of Jeong Yim not students of the style.

Just my thoughts no offense intended. I respect my sifu and think very highly of him. As I am sure you clearly have deep respect and affections for yours. Therefore its not about the system but about the person you follow.

In fact didn’t you yourself created something involving escrima sticks?

Thank you for responding…I really hope you do.

34

  1. Do you have to be a CLF practitioner to ask logical questions of someone who makes wild claims with no evidence?

  2. If Jeong yim died young, how much information could he pass to his students? Now you claim he was 12 when he learnt from Chan Heung… did he say when? How old was Chan Heung then? No dates? Just story “by word of mouth”?

  3. Long chi choy was with Chan Heung BEFORE jeong yim, and if you do a bit of searching I think you will find that long chi choy is mentioned in “history” and in fact well known…

  4. Jeong yim needed to hide from the government…who said? Where is the evidence? He needed to hide…yet he was able to go around running a fut san hung sing gwoon and “develop fame” and become well known as jeong hung sing?

  5. Are you backing off now and saying “it is possible” that jeong yim had name changed to long chi choy and NOT claiming Long chi choy IS jeong yim? Who’s changing who’s story version or claim now?

  6. If you do a bit of searching, I think you’ll find that Long chi choy is quite well known as is Jeong Yim, and there are things that Long chi choy did that are told as there are things told about Jeong Yim. Now IF they are the same person, how can they be at different places and do different things around the same time under different names? Don’t tell me something like the Clark Kent glasses and Superman and no one can recognise?

Are you saying its not my fault your reasoning and claims are contradictory regarding points I,II and III?

35

what are you joining in on a debate when you are not a clf student and have no knowledge of what you are talking about.

#3 - what history, chan heungs?

4–you are not clf .

#5 - what?

#6 what?

i’m done with you bro. join a clf school and then i’ll school you our history.

36

Oh, HSK now your telling us you got the information about Choy Fook’s head being scarred from the Chan Family…
What will I say?

  1. Didn’t you reject Chan family sources and archives? Now your using their “version” to back up a claim you make in your article about Choy Fook having a scarred head. Are you now not rejecting the Chan version and Chan sources?

  2. But wait, there is MORE…the Chan sources tell us CHAN HEUNG is THE FOUNDER of CLF and Jeong Yim was a student, not founder or co-founder. Are you going to reject this part of the Chan version and Chan sources? If so, what are your criteria for using and rejecting things from Chan sources? Do you take bits and pieces out to fit your little model or to fit your taste, or to fit YOUR STORY?

  3. If you lie about your rejection of Chan sources, how do we know you didn’t lie about your claims and other sources?

Who’s laughing?

37

#6:

both loong gee choy and jeong yim have been in king mui, kong mun, singapore, hong kong, and a few othe places that slip my mind right now.

according to the chan clan Jeong yim and loong gee choy both took care of chan koon pak but it is also said believed that both of them taught clf to chan koon pak.
but if you were clf then you would know that.

it sounds like they are the same to me.

38

i’ve never disputed chan heungs version of “his” history, just what they try to tell us is our history. They are not our family so how can they tell us our story? we should tell you.

:stuck_out_tongue:

39

remeber, you are quoting from the chan family on a hung sing history.

try quoting from the hung sing history first.

nut!!!

the chan historical records pertain only to the chan family. the hung sing kwoon maintains their own history as does the buk sing branch.

don’t quote me chan family records, try quoting me some of hung sing history, dumarse.

why would i reject what the chan clan says about choy fook? i have no problem with that he had a scarred head. the green grass monk didn’t though.
so i agree with them about the scared head, so what?

40

Hsk,

  1. Are you now putting words into the mouths of the Chan family?
    This quote:“according to the chan clan Jeong yim and loong gee choy both took care of chan koon pak but it is also said believed that both of them taught clf to chan koon pak.”

Can you point to where do the Chan sources say Jeong Yim taught Chan Koon Pak? Or which member of the Chan family says that? If you can’t, are you making it up or lying?
If you are making things up, aren’t YOU now trying to tell THE CHAN FAMILY’S STORY?

  1. If A has been to Europe, America and Hong Kong, then B goes to these places 10 years later. Now both A and B have been to Europe, America and Hong Kong.
    Does that make A and B the same person? Your reasoning about jeong yim and long chi choy are very flawed.

  2. It is irrelevant whether I practice CLF. Why are you saying I can’t raise questions about wild claims you make? Is it because you cannot answer them?

  3. Oh, and YOUR STORY is passed by word of mouth and elders…BUT WAIT… the Chan Heung’s group ALSO HAVE STORIES PASSED BY WORD OF MOUTH THROUGH ELDERS (DON’T THEY?). Now the Chan Heung’s group also have WRITTEN RECORDS. What have you got?

  4. Don’t quote you Chan records? Wasn’t it YOU WHO USED CHAN SOURCES TO BACK A STATEMENT IN YOUR ARTICLE? REMEMBER WHERE YOU SAID YOU GOT THE INFORMATION ABOUT CHOY FOOK’S HEAD BEING SCARRED?
    Are you being hypocritical?