WCK Origin theories?

Wai Jia: The Kung Fu Forum Wing Chun
1

Hi Guys!

I started a new thread so as not to distract from the intent of the “What is WCK?” thread. As far as WCK origins, there seems to be two major ideas…WCK from Southern Shaolin, and WCK from Fukien White Crane and Emei. If someone has a third origin theory I would love to hear it. The guys from the HFY and Chi Sim WCK families have done a good job in laying out the WCK from Southern Shaolin theory, and the new book “Mastering Kung Fu” really fleshes this out and fills in some of the holes. Hendrik Santo (Phenix) is the main proponent of the WCK from White Crane / Emei theory, but I know that I for one don’t have a good grasp of it. Hendrik has presented bits and parts of his theory with supporting evidence in various threads. I even recall him posting illustrations from an old White Crane book. Now…no disrespect is meant here to Hendrik, but since English is not his primary language sometimes his narrative is hard to follow. But what I would like to see is for someone that has a good grasp of Hendrik’s theory to lay it out for us…in total in one place…perhaps with a reposting of the supporting evidence he has uncovered. If that is a task too big for the forum, perhaps someone could work with Hendrik to write it up as an essay to go up on a website. Rene…are you out there? :slight_smile:

Anyway, my rambling point…“Mastering Kung Fu” does an excellent job of outlining the WCK from Shaolin theory. I’d like to see a good, complete presentation of the WCK from White Crane/Emei theory for comparison.

Keith

2

Now you will have another uncovered component — SunTzu :smiley:

Have fun on comming discussion. Best wishes…

3

Re: WCK Origin theories?

Originally posted by KPM

Anyway, my rambling point…“Mastering Kung Fu” does an excellent job of outlining the WCK from Shaolin theory.

Keith-

This is not an intent to hijack your thread but if you are interested in an in depth discussion of the book “Mastering Kung Fu” we are starting one on the Southern Shaolin Global Kung Fu Discussion Forum.

We will be reading the book as a group and talking about each chapter one by one. All of the chapter sub-forums are set up and ready to go. We are having the 8th public HFY seminar this weekend so expect the posting will start some time next week.

Thanks,

JKW
hfy108.com

4

I’m training with a Chen Tai Chi and White Crane sifu. I see many similarities between WC and White Crane in form and the names of shapes. I don’t really know White Crane history but, if White Crane is older than WC then maybe what Hendrick says has validity.

5

I’m trying to interest Quentin Taratino in producing it since he seems interested in Kung Fu fiction.

John, I suggest you have your people talk to John Woo’s people as well.

6

John- there already maybe an old movie entitled “pillow talk”.
A part of this thread has already been hijacked earlier!!!

7

I look at this issue a little differently. To me, the only reasonable way to handle this question is not who created WCK, and how do they link down to us, because this will always be a guessing game. Rather, I look at WCK, and see how far back we can take it.

With extent branches such as Yip Man (Chan Wah-Shun), Sum Nung (Yuen Kay-San, Fung Chun (Leung Jan), we can get a pretty good idea of what WCK looked like back to the late 1800s. If we add in Cho WCK, it fleshes this idea out.

Given the process of when branches diverge, and what they retain from that point on, we can get back to the Red Junk Opera, which is also what all known branches still extent in China record.

So that’s our known history starting point, and everything before that is not known history, but something between historical conjecture and creation myth.

So, we begin with what do we know about the Red Junk? Scholars have researched both the Operas and the Societies that played a part in the Red Junk, and that can realistically set the stage for the place to which we can trace WCK, and can help immediately sort the ‘less likely’, from the ‘more likely’ (since it gives us a working timeline and historical setting).

Two articles may help at this point:

Opera

Society

But this doesn’t (yet) help us know what kind of martial arts they trained on the red junk. Luckily, history can help again. We know the WCK people were part of the Red Turban Rebellion, and marched into Foshan under the leadership of one of the actors, Lee Man-Mao. And we know Lee Man-Mao’s martial art–Fujian Weng Chun White Crane.

There is more, to be sure. Many in the rebellion were Hakka. Were the Hakka arts represented on the Red Junk? We know there were stories about ‘Southern Shaolin’, and that the Hakka liked to make up names like ‘Southern Mantis’ to cover themselves (and the Hakka history is fairly well mapped to ‘Southern Shaolin’ History, including helping the Qing against the Hokkien (as the ‘Shaolin’ helped them against the Xilu), then they were forced out, and they joined in rebellions against the Qing (like the origin myth of the Tian Di Hui).

As to Emei, I don’t know yet. Hendrik has shown some remarkable evidence, including near complete matches between the WCK Kuen Kuit of the Cho family and the Kuen Kuit of the Emei 12 Posture, which weren’t released until the 1970s, long after the Cho had them. Likewise, immigration patterns of the time (inlcuding those that led to the formation of the TDH) had people moving from Fujian, through the Liangguang, into Sichuan (where the 12 Postures of Emei come from), and back.

Hendrik feels certain some individual (known in legend as Miu Shun) travelled this route, learned both the Weng Chun White Crane and the Emei Twelve Postures, and mixed the shapes of WC with the power generation of 12P, and transmitted this system (known then simply as Siu Lien Tao) to the Red Junk.

I’m not so sure. Nothing has yet convinced me that the Siu Lien Tao predates the Red Junk, simply because martial arts spread, and WCK spread from the Red Junk. If it had been formed anywhere else, any time before, we should be able to find it spread from that place at an earlier time (much as we can find Fujian White Crane spread in Fujian before WCK).

If it does not predate the Red Junk, then we have highly accomplished martial artists and choreographers with all the raw material and the conditions (Red Turban Rebellion times) to warrant the development (continued over subsequent generations) of WCK.

Not the most romantic of theories, no secret monks or nuns, or ancient folk heroes, or anything, but IMHO, it’s where we currently are (though it can, and of course will, be adjusted as new information, independantly verifiable, becomes available).

And I would vote for Peter Jackson directing anything at this point. Everyone else, especially that @#@#$ Lucas, has burned me far to often :wink:

8

Rene sez_

But this doesn’t (yet) help us know what kind of martial arts they trained on the red junk.

((Absolutely. Different kinds of inferences))

Luckily, history can help again.

((Not much- more inferences. The problem with inferences without a clear cut verifiable/falsifiable theory is that different inferences can be drawn from the same “facts”.))

9

Hi Rene,

Fascinating stuff. Thanks for the post.

Regards,
Alan

10

Thanks Rene! That was helpful. But I would still like to see a summation or overview of Hendrick’s origin theory with the various “evidences” he has uncovered…the pictures from the old white crane or emei book, the kuen kit you mentioned, the parallels where he found that Ng Mui may refer to a certain concept in white crane rather than a person, etc. Any chance that the two of you might work together to lay all of it out in an article for your website?

I agree with the idea of tracing a particular version back to where it split or diverged from the rest, and that it would spread from the time/area it was developed. But what do you think of the possibility of a version of WCK being the primary martial art of the secret societies prior to the Red Boat era, and therefore never “spreading” publicly? Do you think it is possible for a martial art particular to the secret societies that has been hidden from the public (but used to train an army to fight in rebellion against the Cheng) to remain hidden from and unseen by the public even after those societies have largely disbanded and the primary reason for secrecy (fall of the Ching dynasty) has ended?
Not meaning to step on any one “families” toes. Just trying to sort out the most likely/probable from the possibilities.

Keith

11

The Speaker implies while the Listener infers. Two possibilities for disconnect in meaning. The trick is to control what you can, which would be inference… unless writing history, in which you control for implications..

…hmm? :wink: There is a point in there.

12

Thanks Rene,

i choose to post then singing karaoke. hahaha

a few points i like to add.

1, since we know how the inch jing evolution / development of the white crane from 1680’s era to 1820. we can interpolate that slt must be developed before 1820. this is because if slt was develop after 1820. then, slt will adopted White crane’s after 1820’s jing type body structure.

2, before 1820, it seems that white crane mostly are some san sau. thus, it is not supprise that the white crane introduce to redboat by Lee Man Mau was this type of art.

However, on the other hand, Emei12p’s structure is set based not san sau based.
thus, the development of slt as said in both yks and cho history that Miu sun develop SLT with white crane and his own art (12p) can be identify with the set based structure of 12p.

Furthermore, the cultivation of jing via using the yjkym and " softer" as we noticed in slt contrast to using of sanchin and “harder” of white crane. this point to the jing of development of slt is an adaption from 12p which is an intergation soft cultivation method.
and this relationship can be back up by yik kam’s kuen kuit of slt as factual evident that in red boat time, at least yik kam train his slt jing with 12p method.

3, 12p is the link to buddhism awareness cultivation technics of SLT.
due to 12p itself was primarily invented as buddist cultivation to achieved 9 level of dyana with healt cultivation as the based of the dyana cultivation… martial art application was a bi product. one can verify these from the kuen kuit of 12p today.
one can also check in the 12p kuenkuit to see how a set develop for real buddhist monks look like interm of cultivation and rules for holding precepts of buddism. by the way, 12p is based on esoteric buddism rather then Chan.

in addition, the buddist awareness cultivation technics of slt is a technics. it doesnt say convert to buddhism.

4, 12p comes with buddhism. the full teaching of 12p comes with a buddhist lineage.
as for slt, since it only used the buddhist awareness cultivation technics, it can or don’t have to have the buddhist lineage.

5, Sun Tzu is un-deniable to be a core application philoshophy of wck.
the philosophy such as the snake which i post in other post,
the philosophy of lan sau, to using the enemy’s weapon to seal against enermy…

Instead of Chan which say nothing about the applications characteristics of wck.

In addition, sun tzu was older then Chan in china.
and it is grear 2500 ago it is good today and the future.

Furtermore, the transmission of Chan needs lineage and mindseal. without this it doesnt support even the practice of chan. certainly, one can write about it or read about it even without lineage and teacher… but that only limited to write and read about it only— not knowing it.

6, as for the anti qing movements. the cho still preserve the saying and salutation of red boat /taiping revolution era.
one can see the salutation fit to fa dan’s ( actor who playing actress ) motion and the saying does match into the CLF’s way of saying or those slogang within dien chun tong of sang hai today.

7, there are writing record for the anti-qing movements. disregards of some think the high level anti-qing people doesnt write anything to not let the qing cacth them. The evidents are rest in ShangHai’s Dien Chun Dang today. the letter from the Siau Dao hui and Taiping Was kept there for one to see.

8, CLF was among the number one martial art to train the anti-qing in canton. and was quest by anti qing, the founder train the trop. read the history of clf.
Thust, there is no reason to belive there is a special hidden sole poiertery martial art keep within anti-qing as top secret weapon. beside, real anti-qing martial artists in canton 1850’s era has to in some way know /connect to the CLF people because they are the same “team”.
In fujian, people of White crane did has record of involving with taiping to rage battle against Qing. and was give a prince title to the white crane practitioner by taiping’s gorvement.

9, on the other hand, if there is a special hidden sole poiertery martial art keep within anti-qing as top secret weapon, then one should be able to brought up a full characterictics of this martial art in term of the ancient chinese way of chategolies a system.
, then, from that we can know which dynasty it was develop. what kind of special jing it was pioneer with. what kind of application phylosophy it based on. I am and i think we all always
has opening for differents but it has to come with evidents not just claim or a build up with modern day concept.

thus, today, we do have a cross fields, cross histories, cross phylosophies as bases of wck research. we have evidents andnot just make claim thus that is scientific.

this is a technical as technical post. hope that one doesnt take this post more then what it is.

as for a Whole view of how We have edivents to link. if one just look at the areas involve above. one can see it is a star wars type of work— vast , and the link is complicated.
Can I handle these all myself ? the answer is no.

that is because, everyone from wck families has a piece
to contribute. Say Jim and I communicate and we find technics which similar for yik kam with koo lo. Rene and I communicate and I found out the how the "Ten fingers single heart " anti-qing code was impliment in YKS. Ken and I meet and I found Some Jing method from YM lineage which is significant for wck…
thus, it is every wcners pice of art. certainly, not my alone.
no one in wck family should be exclude.
it is our’s or everyone’s wck. imho.

13

KPM,

Thanks for your compliments on “Mastering Kung Fu”. I just got my own copy yesterday finally, and am just reading through it myself. Although, I had already been made aware of much of the historical knowledge in my training, it is a great pleasure to finally see my Sifu’s knowledge combined with the VT museums historical reasearch in one fine book.

On a side note, obviously it appears the backlash has begun, considering what looks like traces of some deleted posts. That’s probably for the best, however, I would think they would get booted from their membership entirely as I’ve witnessed others have in the past. But of course, if the source of these posts would have the courage to address their issues in a direct manner, then we wouldn’t have these distractions at all.

Back to topic…

I too would like to see Hendriks research collectied and put into a cohesive book. I don’t have a problem with what he says… just the way he says it. And unlike Rene here, I think Hendrik is very aware of all that he says, implys, and more importantly leaves out… albeit his third, fourth or fifth language. I much prefer the manner and of Rene’s post here, not to mention the fact the Rene is actually saying something here.

Rene,

have you read the “Mastering Kung Fu” book yet??? I’d be curious to hear your take on it. The gist of my problem with Hendrick’s research, is that personally it doesn’t relate to my Wing Chun experience at all. Many of the stated simularities that he finds in common with White Crane simply do not exist in my system. And many things that exist in my system, do not appear in other lineages either.

If you read the book, I think that regardless of what WC origin you ultimately choose, the awareness that you gain of my system’s fundamental differences will help your understanding of my position immensely.

Back to work… no holiday for me…

Alex

14

Excerpt from Hendrik:
this is a technical as technical post. hope that one doesnt take this post more then what it is.

as for a Whole view of how We have edivents to link. if one just look at the areas involve above. one can see it is a star wars type of work— vast , and the link is complicated.
Can I handle these all myself ? the answer is no.

that is because, everyone from wck families has a piece
to contribute.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------Good technical post Hendrik-including pointing out
1.the need to distinguish between Chan and esoteric Buddhism.
2.the uniqueness of the emei postures
3, the contibutions but limitations of Fujian crane (re.inch power).

Rene reminded us of your earlier point on migration patterns from Fujian to Sichuan- an important communication link.
But, in the end you conformed for me - a basic methodological problem that makes tracing the history of wing chun immensely formidable…

The scattering and separate development of wing chun has resulted in very great diversities in styles and understandings.

The challenge of piecing together today- a cohesive conception of what is wing chun and then tracing it backward and seeing the accretions is an immense task requiring funding, time, cooperative sources- beyond just document review or solitary reflection. Then there is the problem- that lots of very good wing chun folks are not really curious about history- preferring to devote their energies to the preservation and further development of what has been directly transmitted to them..

So much of wing chun discussion is chip on the shoulder lineage driven and self serving. We can get some historical insights here and there-but IMO-- but we are pretty far from having a value free ideology free history of the art.

In the meantime- its possible to have a very good understanding of wing chun and help develop it and apply it without spending too much time on its history- Ip Man is a good example of that
kind of acheievement..

There is a veritable tower of babel on what is wing chun today-
on centerline theory, on weighting, how to do a wing chun punch,
position of feet, footwork, conceptions on nature and source of power, body angling, role of tension, chi gung, and so many other things.
Given the tower of babel analogy-there is the danger of basically tracing the history of pidgin english rather an understanding of language.

15

my post seems to have appeared twice…

sorry

ALex

16

Hi JOy,

When I present my data of evidents, I speak with confident, since those data exist.
However, as an individual of 21th century we all know having an open mind is a better attitude.

You have be in Univ research for long long time, As you sure know, There is no cloclusion can be drawn or completed if the issue or item is a alive and still continously growing, which is different from as it is going to the musium like the Apolo 11th, where the mission is completed and put aside.

in addition, the integration effort from everyone who contibute to WCK is very dynamic and a live. thus, it must be credited but cannot be drawn a line of completion since WCK is alive.

My view on these original stuffs are as the following:

1, different people can have different way of presenting thier history. and that is acceptable provided DO NOT FORCE others to agree one’s view but be able to accept others.

One can present as much evidents so that others can make thier own conclusion, be it agree or dis agree. certainly people can raise question and doubt on the evidents and hopefully we all learn to be as in the university, cross examp the theory and data of evidents instead of get defensive.

2, the original theory and the information of the history of a lineage does influence or shape the outcome of the characteristics of thier practice.

Thus, the original theory and information is the seed of the karma to blossom the flower what one plants. and whatever flower seed one picked that shape the future or the fruit. he who believe is soft will have a characteristics of soft. He who believe in hard with have a characteristics of hard. He who believe in ShaoLin will have characteristics of Shao Lin. He who believe in Emei will have a characteristics of emei. Thus, for me it is not worthed to argue which original theory is correct… the result is in the characteristic of the pratice. The southern chinese eat rice and the northern eat noddle. so, there is nothing right or wrong they just as it is and the key is just to find out are they northern or southern or may be mix?

WCK is not an easy subject, however, the beauty of a democratic world is there is not only one voice but can be many voices and co exist.

Time to go to sleep. until see you again.

17

Notes on and to Hendrik in brackets-

When I present my data of evidents, I speak with confident, since those data exist.

(( Hendrik-I have no doubts on that score. Sometimes the problem is that you have posted much over time…lots of net readers by the nature of the medium do not connect or sometimes even remember the details and the links of your
thesis over time.

Also true that when the contemporay events are controversial enough- history or the pursuit of history becomes more problematic.))))

in addition, the integration effort from everyone who contibute to WCK is very dynamic and a live. thus, it must be credited but cannot be drawn a line of completion since WCK is alive.

((True. But more to it—before credited- not always understood-
and reacted to in a knee jerk reflexive manner))

My view on these original stuffs are as the following:

((Agree with the rest. Listening isnt an easy art- in wing chun (ting jing?) or life. Also peole reify their habits based on their perception of their history. Thats really the important role of myths (mixes of fact and fancy)which pass as history. Most myths and histories have some facts attached to them- the issue of sufficiency is often bypassed. You take American history— you can pick your thesis, myth or fancy…

  1. America- a Christian Nation- the shining city on the hill- Puritans, Reagan, Limbaugh.
  2. America founded by substantial property owners-Charles Beard.
  3. America as Manifest Destiny (Jackson, Kipling etc)
  4. Slavery as Evil(Abolitionists)
  5. Slavery as relatively benign (Calhoun, revisionist historians- Time on the Cross)
    6/. America asa Beacon of Freedom(Jefferson, Paine etc on the Bill of Rights, Hamilton on commerce). The Staute of Liberty with its
    Lazarus poem as beacon to immigrants by passed the original idea to celebrate emancipation of blacks- would have been controversial.
  6. America as illegal acquisition of tribal property (roger Williams, Deloria) hey it’s Columbus day!
  7. America as founded on myths that shouldnt be examined to closely. The holy of holies might be empty.(Daniel Boorstin)

There is even more to the cafetaria of US history alone.

All myth makers -historians, politicians. demagogues can cite “facts”. Interesting reads. Lots of stories.

Dont misunderstand- I think that you have done some important work-get it into articles and books and movies(Roots).

joy

18

Hendrik,

just wanted to say that I acknowledge and appreciate the tone and core of your last post.

Thanks

Alex

PS Having a historian for a sister, has made very very aware of the problems that arise when one talks of history and the notion of historical fact.

In my mind, all research is good research. Unbiased research is of course the absolute ideal.

19

I totally agree with you Alex! :slight_smile:

I heard there was a HFY seminar in Arizona. Did anyone from Sifu Fong’s group show up? And congratulations on the book btw!

Peace!

20

Originally posted by yuanfen
[B](( Hendrik-I have no doubts on that score. Sometimes the problem is that you have posted much over time…lots of net readers by the nature of the medium do not connect or sometimes even remember the details and the links of your
thesis over time.

[/B]

That’s what I was getting at in the beginning of this thread. :slight_smile: Hence my request for Hendrik (perhaps with some help) to write up his theory with the supporting evidence he has uncovered so far and put it up on a website for all to refer to. The essay can always be updated as new ideas and evidence emerges. But I for one do not have a good grasp of Hendrik’s theory, and I am sure I am not the only one. I’d love to see something cohesive to refer to.

Keith