WCK Origin theories?

Hung Men

Rene,

But, the saga of Qing continous…
Generally I find these Hendrikism anything but obvious. The extent and role of the secret societies and the subsequent overthrow of the Qing may never fully be realized.
For example, in Guangdong province in 1854-1855, a Hung-style organization known as the Red Turbans rose up in revolt against the Ching government. Although this was a widespread uprising which spread across several counties and involved tens of thousands of people fighting in some battles the rebels never developed a centralized leadership. Footnote Two Similarly, even during the large turn of the century Boxer uprising, effective centralized leadership of the Boxers proved to be a problem. Footnote Three
The cumulative effects of these battles has to be inserted into the equation when discussing the long term demise of the Qing Dynasty.

The Hung Societies

If you check out the Endnotes on that link, The Hung Society they wrote this,

  1. The bulk of this material comes from a few primary sources. Morgan’s Triad Societies of Hong Kong.(1960, Crown Copyright Reserved, The Government Printer, Hong Kong) is an excellent source for information on the structure and form of Triad societies in Hong Kong shortly after the second world war. (The author asserted that these traditions were in decline during the period he wrote and researched the subject.) Unfortunately, Morgan tends to skimp a bit on the development of this form.

Ward and Stirling’s The Hung Society. (privately published, London, 1925.) contained the best possible description of the societies available to the authors. This was based on extensive research done during their stint as civil servants in the Crown colony of Malaya

Dian H. Murray, in collaboration with Qin Biaoqi, produced The Origins of the Tiandihui -The Chinese Triads in Legend and History. (1994, Stanford University Press, Stanford California). This valuable work contains little information on the later form of the societies, but it does contain invaluable information on how they were founded and spread. This source describes the early, haphazard recruiting practices which had apparently been changed by the time Morgan wrote.

  1. Wakeman, Frederic. 1966. Strangers at the Gate -Social Disorder in South China, 1839-1861. University of California Press. Berkeley.

  2. It should be mentioned that the Boxers were based on a Ching style structure. This would be expected as they orginated in the north of China. Nevertheless, they shared the same problem of central organization.

  3. From Ward and Stirling, The Hung Society, Volume I., pp. 14-15. London, 1925. Privately published in a limited edition.

  4. Macao is a city located on the Southern coast of China not far from Hong Kong. There are convenient ferry and hydrofoil services shuttling between the two locations. Macao was founded in the sixteenth century by the Portuguese as a base of trade with China. For centuries it has been a Portuguese colony and at the time of this writing still is. It is scheduled to be returned to Chinese rule in 1999.

  5. pp. 102-103, “Some Notes on the Ko-Lao Hui in Late Ch’ing China,” by Charlton M. Lewis. In Popular Movements and Secret Societies in China, 1840-1950. Edited by Jean Chesnaux.

The internal structure of the Ko-Lao Hui is quite interesting and described fully in the section on this organization in chapter sixteen.

  1. Ward and Stirling, Volume One, Page 16.

  2. By way of contrast, see Morgan’s description of Hung societies and compare it to Dian H. Murray.

  3. Ward and Stirling, Volume One, page 16.

For more details on Chinese numerology and number beliefs, a good beginning reference is Chinese Numbers -Significance, Symbolism, and Traditions. by Evelyn Lip. (1992, Heian International, Inc. Union City, California.)

It’s quite interesting the amount of research they did on this.

Regards

CD

Carl,

I have, (and have referenced in previous articles mentioned on this thread), several of those books, and indeed, believe anyone serious about WCK history has to understand the time and place, and related history (such as in those books), and their theory must fit within the bounds of said.

IMHO, it is a grave mistake to have a theory and then set out to prove it–too much chance for bias (preconception) and selectivity (ignoring what does not match the large investment previously made). Rather, I think we must let the art speak for itself, and gather what information we can to see what theory is suggested by it (rather than imposed on it.)

Tony,

Again, what part are you saying shows directly the primary reason for the fall of the Qing being an army of trained WCK warriors?

Rene,

If my memory serve,
Sun Yat Sen’s Body Guard is Du Xing Wu of Zee Ran Men or the Door of Natural. nothing said about WCK warrior.

Another body guard,

In 1922 he deserted his Wife and moved to China to become a body guard for Sun Yat Sen.

Although he never learned to speak Mandarin or any of the other Chinese dialects he did become a General in the Nationalist Army.

Sun Yat Sen had untiled the Nationalists and the Communists to fight against the Japanese.

The Chinese couldn¡¦t pronounce his name and because he wore two guns they called him Two Gun Cohen.

http://servercc.oakton.edu/~friend/abbey2.html

Sorry still no WCK warrior around Sun Yat Sen.

Generally I find these Hendrikism anything but obvious. —C

Hendrikism is just scientificism. not “against-personalism.”

I always look for data of evidents to support. as for those involvement to the 1850’s movement, I believe there are some WCK ancestors involve.

But, then, someone from this ancestors has to show the code of that time. without that code, it is similar to saying I own the safe which store diamond in B O A, but I don’t have the passed words. But that is all mine diamond.

Which secret societies? the one from Shao Lin or the one from those overseas chineses students who go study in Hawii, in england, in Japan,…

Taiping is pretty successful in the begining. But too bad, it called itself The Taiping Heavenly Kingdom but NOT MING. Thus, it is not about overthrown Qing Return to MIng. it is about someone wants to be the king himself.

Hung Mo

Rene,

Tony, Again, what part are you saying shows directly the primary reason for the fall of the Qing being an army of trained WCK warriors?

Rene, my first reply was an attempt to dispell the notion that the Qing are still in business.

originally posted by hendrik
if they succeed then Qing was overthrown. But, the saga of Qing continous…
Then my next post was to point out that an army of revolutionist wing chun practitioners did exist and was instrumental in the eventual overthrow of the Qing Dynasty.

The primary reason for the eventual fall of the Qing was not the main focal point of my post, that would be that indeed wing chun practicing armies were in existance and did play a role in bringing down the Qing. Nothing more nothing less.

as for primary…

After the mid-Qing period, the dynasty failed to adjust as new problems arose. Rampant corruption, a steady decentralization of power, warfare, rebellions, overpopulation and economic disasters plagued the once glorious empire. Rebellions sprouted like mushrooms after a rain, one of which, the uprising by the White Lotus Sect, that lasted for nine years, put an end to the golden age of the Qing. In 1840, the 20th year of the Daoguang reign, the Opium War, an armed invasion of China by foreign capitalists, broke out. The Qing government was forced to sign a series of unreasonable treaties, which demanded China to cede territories, pay indemnities and/or open trading ports. Eventually China became a semi-feudal and semi-colonized country.

You or anyone else is free to choose one of the many reasons as being primary yet which ever you choose it is as it should be forever inevitably tied to the unseen work of the Hung men and women of the secret societies, and though the Ming did not reclaim command of China this does not deminish in any way the efforts and contributions of those unsung wing chun soldiers who fought valiantly from day one to accomplish that end.

Madame Chiang, 105, Chinese Leader’s Widow, Dies

Originally posted by yuanfen
Re: the Nationalist revolution of Sun yat Sen- didnt live very long afterwards. Sun Yat Sen’s land redistribution ideas died soon.Chiang Kai Shek, his wife and brothers–Wellington Koo and others in Kuomintang soon took over. The nationalists were not necessarily friends of Buddhism either- though they were more tolerant than Mao. Chiang Kai Shek’s folks lobbed shells into Shaolin- they opposed the Abbot’s view of local control which also meant barons/warlords. The KMT had a “western” vision centralised control in a nation state-nationalism— Koo and Co were elite bankers financiers and under Madame CKS’s influence-
methodist fundamentalism was the inhouse way.

As an historical footnote, this may be as on topic as anything on this thread.

[url=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=68&ncid=68&e=4&u=/nyt/20031024/ts_nyt/madamechiang105chineseleaderswidowdies]Madame Chiang, 105, the widow of Chiang Kai Shek, died today.

Regards,

History of Triad = HIstory of WCK?

Original of Triad = Original of WCK?

Triad = Shao Lin?

Chan = WCK ?

Over thrown Qing is WCK’s mission? If so What Happen with CLF ?

What Sun Yat-Sen and Chiang Kai-sek got todo with WCK?

:confused:

Stirring up Trouble.

Originally posted by Phenix
[B]History of Triad = HIstory of WCK?

Original of Triad = Original of WCK?

Triad = Shao Lin?

Chan = WCK ?

:confused: [/B]
IMO Hendrik needs to stick with his own White Crane = Sun Tzu = Taiji = Cameron Diaz before spreading more illusions through this forum.

It is VERY clear you do not understand what Shaolin is in history or in nature. Thus you paint a picture of modern day society’s views of the Triad organizations ( the ones corrupted by the opium wars) with the essense of Shaolin. Playing a joker to the crowd? Or painting a false picture of other research parties?

If you’re :confused: about your own question, why not ask the people who are studying the roots of Shaolin Wing Chun (hint hint VTM) rather than the people who (seriously) aren’t?!? Otherwise, it’s much healthier to stay on your own research path than stir up trouble to give other people a hard time. Oh wait, you already burnt those bridges haven’t you! Never mind.

More Questions

WCK founder = ET?

Shao LIn = AS ET like to define it?

Qing Triad = historians are wrong only the ET claim is the truth ?

Original of WCK = ET say so you have to agree or you are wrong if you question?

Where ET live = no where in the world, it is beyond this planet.

Original WCK lineage = Blood line of Dracula

Yat Chan = One Zen = Emptiness = non existance?

Code of anti-Qing Rebel = can’t tell you the Qing will come to get me?

WCK = Wing Can Kook? Yen Can cook?

WCK founder = Yen the cook ?

Anti- Qing = KILL BILL ?

Shao LIn MONKs = Anti Qing?

:confused:

Hi Savi,

How much history have you read?

In the books I have read, the triads existed since China existed. Though not originally triads, benevolent societies were a presence in the country for a very long time. As for the Opium wars etc, if I remember my reading, the Triads, Heaven and Earth and the Red Bandana Gangs failed pretty miserably. Not only that but often they were more ruthless, dangerous and oppressive then the government they were overthrowing.

It seems that little if any real association can be found between these pseudo-religious groups and real Chan Buddhism.

What’s your take please?

David

canglong

“Clearly, it is entirely incorrect to see the many secret societies of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries as a single, large, centrally controlled organization held under the sway of a tyrannical despot who ruled from hiding. Not only did the technology prohibit attempts to control the geographically widespread societies in such a fashion, there was little benefit to the group as a whole from such centralization.”

This was in the article you posted, how does this help the secret master train everyone in the secret Shaolin system theory?

David

He is a monk and from shao lin and has Chan lineage.

http://home.wanadoo.nl/info-kungfu-supply/shigaocan/

his art doesn’t look WC isn’t it?

So Which shao Lin WCK from?

Re: Hung Mo

Originally posted by canglong
[B]Rene,

Rene, my first reply was an attempt to dispell the notion that the Qing are still in business. Then my next post was to point out that an army of revolutionist wing chun practitioners did exist and was instrumental in the eventual overthrow of the Qing Dynasty.

[/B]

—Now this is the part of the “history” that I have a problem with. Just what evidence is there that any such army trained in WCK existed? An “army” implies a fair number of people. What happened to the members of this army that left the society or were remnants of the army after the society later lost its revolutionary focuse or disbanded? Wouldn’t they have continued to practice or teach their WCK? I just cannot see how an entire ARMY of WCK soldiers could fail to leave a trace of their art behind. Yet we find no real evidence of WCK prior to the Red Boat era. The other problem I have with this idea of HFY being a military system is that it does not include the typical battlefield weapons or tactics. Armies typically fought on the battlefield in formations, not one on one. So were are the HFY tactics that teach typical military troop formations? The typical battlefield weapons of the day include such things as halberds, spears, and swords with shields that are not part of the HFY curriculum. I see nothing unique in HFY that sets it apart as a "military " or “battlefield” martial art any more than what the recent book likes to refer to as “Popular Wing Chun.”

Keith

originally posted by hendrik
Historicaly, writing in some Shao Lin book, some Ming generals did hide in Shao Lin or Buddhist temple trying to activate this Chan elevator for advance spiritual penetration martial arts Mountain to counter Qing. that is a fact.
Glad you finally see the light as far as this topic is concerned.
originally posted by hendrik
He is a monk and from shao lin and has Chan lineage.
First you advocate the argument that no shaolin warriors monks ever existed now you are finding them yourself. Now we can move on from this topic as well.
originally posted by keith
Yet we find no real evidence of WCK prior to the Red Boat era. The other problem I have with this idea of HFY being a military system is that it does not include the typical battlefield weapons or tactics. Armies typically fought on the battlefield in formations, not one on one. So were are the HFY tactics that teach typical military troop formations? The typical battlefield weapons of the day include such things as halberds, spears, and swords with shields that are not part of the HFY curriculum. I see nothing unique in HFY that sets it apart as a "military " or “battlefield” martial art any more than what the recent book likes to refer to as “Popular Wing Chun.”
The book “Mastering Kung Fu” answered these questions, using the book as a reference try researching some of these as well as any other questions you might have on your own and I think you will find some of the answers to your questions. You are also invited to join the discussion of these and many other topics of the book over at hfy108.

Weren’t the Qing quite involved with Buddhism and Shaolin as well?

Originally posted by canglong
The book “Mastering Kung Fu” answered these questions,

—No it doesn’t. I have the book, I have read it, and it generates more questions than it answers. It has no references or footnotes to direct anyone in their own research as you suggest.

Keith

Canglong,

Hahahahahaha,

I don’t know about you but I am a legit southern shao lin disciple. Suprise suprise.

This monk is my Sigung of Shao Lin style.
My sifu is his monk student Ven. Fa Chan.
I study with Ven Fa Chan from Chan Buddhism to accupuncture to martial art.

So Sorry to tell you, his art is NOT WCK but Lohan Kuen, Iron palm… ect and very far from WCK.

See, one can brought up all the shao lin north, shao lin south, shao lin east, shao lin west. Monk warriors…
But what is that got to do with WCK?
How to prof they are related?

HOw do one prove one’s art is from southern Shao Lin?
How do one prof one’s MONK lineage related to a Southern Shao Lin not even mention WCK yet?

Finally, even one is a legit Southern Shao Lin disciple. That say nothing about WCK.

Originally posted by reneritchie
Weren’t the Qing quite involved with Buddhism and Shaolin as well?

Sure,

You can read about Qing and Shao Lin and Warrior Monks and the color of the cloth the Han Monks and the Lama monks wears in the lecture of Chan patriach HSu Yun as I have qoute long time ago.

Qing Emperor Yung Chern is a Chan Buddhist who had attain Satory or enlignthement. Read that in Buddhist history of China.

Going into the history a bit, looking at revolutionary societies from the Ming to the Qing to the Nationalists, there are some things to keep in mind. Between the Opium Wars and the Boxer Rebellion, there was a schism that developed in the various revolutionary groups. While some had always been predatory in nature from their conception, others were genuinely focused on overthrowing the Qing and restore the Ming. The merits of the Ming are open to debate. Looking at those times from now, we have a different sense of the Ming and the Qing. It is true that the first emperor of the Qing was very supportive of Buddhism and did much to spread the teachings of Buddha. It is also true that towards the end of the Ming Dynasty the government was fairly corrupt. However, it is necessary to remember that the people at that time had quite a different view of being ruled by the Qing vs. the Ming. The Chu family was of the Han race, the Manchu were not. So, regardless of any social or economic reforms created by the Qing, they also forced all non-Manchu men to shave the front of their heads and plait their hair into long tails, reminiscent of the back end of a horse (among other mistreatments). So, some groups organized to fight against the Qing. The VTM has found some evidence that the Ming royal family was instrumental in creating at least one revolutionary group with the support of a Chan family (Chan like Chan Wah Shun, not like the form of Buddhism). Secret Societies of one sort or another have existed in China for centuries so the creation of another was no great shift in thinking.

After the establishment of the Qing Dynasty in 1683, most of the rebellious groups went underground. From current VTM research, Wing Chun was created in the time between the fall of the Ming and the establishment of the Qing – around 40 years between 1644-1683. This date may change with the collection of new information but it’s the working model we have right now.

Jumping forwards to the 1800s, the three Opium Wars occurred and the revolutionary groups involved didn’t fare well – and sanctions were levied against China. The revolutionary groups lost much in the way of popular support through the increasingly harsh sanction. At this time, a schism developed in the revolutionary groups. With the increase in drug trade, some groups wanted to maintain control of the drugs and continue to make money (there had always been groups involved in drugs, sex, racketeering, etc. in China for centuries). Other groups wanted to focus on keeping the foreigners off Chinese soil. Still other groups took no interest in either money or political action and instead focused on martial arts. Rolling forward to the Boxer Rebellion and its failure to remove the foreign powers, popular opinion towards the secret societies reached the lowest levels. Each of the three types of societies went even more underground, becoming many of the secret societies of today.

In terms of the fall of the Qing Dynasty, it happened with the support of the politically focused secret societies. These societies, in an earlier age, were anti-Qing and included training in martial arts – just as in the criminal societies and the martial societies. Yet, each of the three groups had different focus. HFY comes out of the martial societies – related to the political and criminal groups in the sense of a common history BUT walking a different path.

Keith: WCK was designed for fighting one-to-one, not group-on-group. Southern systems share this in common, an emphasis on one-to-one skills as opposed to small unit vs. small unit tactics. In Mastering Kung Fu, this is what was meant – the military strategic and tactic thinking was involved in the creation of the system and in the logic of the training methods. This is not to say that the system was designed to train a single soldier to function as part of a larger squad, platoon, company, battalion or regiment. Yet – with an understanding of how the limbs support each other, each part of the body can be considered as an element in an overall strategy; thus, the body serves as a vehicle to understand all forms of combat (think of combined arms warfare wherein artillery softens up a target (legs), then mechanized infantry move in to mop up (hands) – VERY simplistic analogy to the type of training in HFY that I have experienced).

In the revolutionary secret societies many styles were taught and utilized – HFY was not necessarily the hand-to-hand system of all cells in the societies – especially in light of the widespread use of hung ga… and even it HFY was, there are many training tracks that develop different hand-to-hand skills. In the societies not everyone was taught to understand why they did what they did. They were taught – if here, do this; if there, do that – and Kiu Sau and/or Chi Sau served to plug the holes in skill by developing fast reactions. Historically, not everyone was taught the whole HFY system.

Jeremy R.