[QUOTE=Lau;1002363]Lai See,
That could have been my exact post ! Of course all theory on FCTT is in Jek bo (called Chi Pu for us in Hakka). Many people use the words, but it is rare to see it actually been done.
QUOTE]
Thank you.
Lai See,
Are you being pleasant or rude? We are all using a lot of words. We are on a forum.
Ha Hon Hung was one of CLC’s early students, like it or not. I used to mainly train Jik Bo from his line. I don’t train it much anymore. I have trained it and seen it in most lines. Heck, some lines have it where the finger jab is in a horse stance, then the punch is in a front stance. Have you ever seen that one? Is it Guangzhou line? Jik Bo is Jik Bo, like you say, right?
There isn’t much difference, a move here or there, depending on which line you are from. All of it, is CLC’s Bak Mei, as he taught these people this art…Jik Bo only being from Hong Kong line doesn’t mean anything. It isn’t more original, and it doesn’t have more intent, or anything like that…
I know that the sets are not going to develop much “Chi” by themselves because I have already tried that. You would be better off learning Tai Ji than doing those sets slow. They aren’t meant to be done slow. They aren’t set up that way. I mentioned that the sets have maybe 3 hands that could be considered traditional Daoist Postures for Chi Gung. If you want to know about it, study about it. Your Grandmaster learned from a monk. They would have meditated, ALOT!!!
Just going slow and doing those forms isn’t Chi Gung.
[QUOTE=TAO YIN;1002377]Lai See,
Are you being pleasant or rude? We are all using a lot of words. We are on a forum.
Ha Hon Hung was one of CLC’s early students, like it or not. I used to mainly train Jik Bo from his line. I don’t train it much anymore. I have trained it and seen it in most lines. Heck, some lines have it where the finger jab is in a horse stance, then the punch is in a front stance. Have you ever seen that one? Is it Guangzhou line? Jik Bo is Jik Bo, like you say, right?
There isn’t much difference, a move here or there, depending on which line you are from. All of it, is CLC’s Bak Mei, as he taught these people this art…Jik Bo only being from Hong Kong line doesn’t mean anything. It isn’t more original, and it doesn’t have more intent, or anything like that…
I know that the sets are not going to develop much “Chi” by themselves because I have already tried that. You would be better off learning Tai Ji than doing those sets slow. They aren’t meant to be done slow. They aren’t set up that way. I mentioned that the sets have maybe 3 hands that could be considered traditional Daoist Postures for Chi Gung. If you want to know about it, study about it. Your Grandmaster learned from a monk. They would have meditated, ALOT!!!
Just going slow and doing those forms isn’t Chi Gung.[/QUOTE]
Not to mention the famous pic of CLC in a monk’s robe doing a meditation. As a matter of fact, a couple of years ago, a gentlemen from the guangzhou line posted on here that he had meds that went hand in hand with his PM. The chi gung is to develope the energy in a pulse type manner.
Plus, I understand what my bro means as we trained jik bo for years. I have to admit that training jik bo made me understand good body mechanics and yes is somewhat internal, but I guess thats why PM is not pruely an internal art. To be internal you need meds (standing, moving, sitting, etc…). A good example would be YI Chuan. No forms, only standing meds, push hands and fighting.
Lau,
Ging can only flow when you are relaxed, but what happens when you tense up the fist upon contact?
Bless,
Buby
Buby,
How you doing bro? Good post! Also, your last question there to Lau, is an extremely important question. I still can’t get that down sometimes, but work on it a lot.
[QUOTE=TAO YIN;1002403]Buby,
How you doing bro? Good post! Also, your last question there to Lau, is an extremely important question. I still can’t get that down sometimes, but work on it a lot.[/QUOTE]
Pretty good bro! How are you? When you coming to Brooklyn?
Yeah, it takes time. I’m much better at it now, since I’m back to sparring and bag work again. Bro, all the punches to air will not teach timing, nor will it give you confidence that you can pull it off. Spar, Spar and spar some more. The real trick for me was letting go. Once I did, everything came natural.
Bless,
Buby
Yes18 ghostbridge is internal students only, since I have more than 1 sifui won’t be able to become internal for bai mei.
I’m ok with that though goodbasic pak mei is slot better than 10 forms of something else. IMO.
Bro,
For sure! I practice maybe 2 forms for the fun of them. For a long time, mostly what I was doing was sparring, rolling, bagwork, conditioning. Now, I am really getting into cultivation. You will understand this, “if you can’t do 108s, don’t do kung fu.” 
Something funny about what you said, is relating FCTT in practicing it with regular Jik Bo. Form style FCTT goes away pretty quickly sparring with it. Or doing bagwork.
My meaning is for example , when a person can finger jab the heavy bag with fctt, and with the same kind of energy they use in their forms, then they are getting somewhere. Most people say turn the finger jab into a regular jab. Why have the finger strike at all then?
Sifu told me you have been going off on your training! Funny you mention Brooklyn. I was actually looking for work there today. Anyways, I do plan to come up there and check out the place soon. I’ll let you know for sure. Cheers!
[QUOTE=TAO YIN;1002377]Lai See,
Are you being pleasant or rude? We are all using a lot of words. We are on a forum.
Ha Hon Hung was one of CLC’s early students, like it or not. I used to mainly train Jik Bo from his line. I don’t train it much anymore. I have trained it and seen it in most lines. Heck, some lines have it where the finger jab is in a horse stance, then the punch is in a front stance. Have you ever seen that one? Is it Guangzhou line? Jik Bo is Jik Bo, like you say, right?
There isn’t much difference, a move here or there, depending on which line you are from. All of it, is CLC’s Bak Mei, as he taught these people this art…Jik Bo only being from Hong Kong line doesn’t mean anything. It isn’t more original, and it doesn’t have more intent, or anything like that…
I know that the sets are not going to develop much “Chi” by themselves because I have already tried that. You would be better off learning Tai Ji than doing those sets slow. They aren’t meant to be done slow. They aren’t set up that way. I mentioned that the sets have maybe 3 hands that could be considered traditional Daoist Postures for Chi Gung. If you want to know about it, study about it. Your Grandmaster learned from a monk. They would have meditated, ALOT!!!
Just going slow and doing those forms isn’t Chi Gung.[/QUOTE]
Effectively I am being both. One of the differences between you and I posting on this forum is that you will have noted that I don’t tend to use words that simply cannot be explained on such a medium as this forum. In fact I don’t really use them full stop. You however, do, that is my point regarding ‘words’.
I never stated that I liked anything, “or not” in the regard of those that Cheung lai Chuen taught. Your inference not mine.
In a nutshell and from my perspective Jik Bou IS Jik Bou. For example those that practice it in extended unrealistic stances are not doing the Jik Bou that I know. Those that concern themselves with a ‘finger jab’ for that movement are not either and clearly haven’t been taught all the movements therein. That is a simple fact and not rude.
I simply don’t understand what it is that you are trying to get across to me. If I dissect your points logically you appear to be saying that what I (amongst others) practice isn’t giving me ‘something’ that your training is.
Well, here is a thing, yes and so what? Do you see the point I am making?
Perhaps I don’t want your Chi Gung.
What I have learnt and practice and indeed teach, suits me. And it suited my teacher, and his.
For the record, I don’t practice them slowly. 
Lai See,
Please direct me to what I have said that can’t be explained on a medium such as this forum. I will explain. Perhaps in the future if you don’t understand my words, just say “I don’t understand what you are saying here…” I’ll agree with you, I am too wordy sometimes. I just figured you would know. Then again, if you don’t understand “Chi Gung,” why post?
Jik Bo is Jik Bo. Jik Bo isn’t Chi Gung. Same goes, Bil Jee is Bil Jee. It’s a finger jab. You can use it to parry for your next Sut Choy/ Chum Choy, or try to drive it in your opponent’s armpit, or strike them in the eye, or do a thousand different things with it…You can change it into a fist, you can use it to thrust your opponent away in the clinch… BUT, in the form it’s a Finger Jab, not an “all applications apply” Godsend.
You are right about my inference. I am just used to most saying this isn’t this and that isn’t that because it isn’t CLC Purebred Pedigree Hong Kong Pak Mei TM Inc…
That is good if you dissect my points. That is good if I dissect your points. I asked if anyone trained Chi Gung. You said that you did with Jik Bo, but that Jik Bo is Jik Bo…
And you are right. What I am getting out of my training is different than what you are getting, and vice versa. I gain something you don’t, you gain something I don’t. Everyday this occurs, with every fleeting moment of our lives as humans.
It isn’t a question of you wanting my Chi Gung. It is a question of you knowing Chi Gung. Jik Bo isn’t Chi Gung. Chi Gung isn’t built into those forms. Chi Gung is Chi Gung. Don’t you think that your Grandmaster CLC studied Chi Gung? Don’t you think it would help you?
And why is horse stance and extended unrealistic stance? Guangzhou Bak Mei uses it in training their Jik Bo right?
[QUOTE=TAO YIN;1002509]Lai See,
1) Please direct me to what I have said that can’t be explained on a medium such as this forum. I will explain.
Perhaps in the future if you don’t understand my words, just say “I don’t understand what you are saying here…” I’ll agree with you, I am too wordy sometimes. I just figured you would know.
2) Then again, if you don’t understand “Chi Gung,” why post?
Jik Bo is Jik Bo. Jik Bo isn’t Chi Gung. Same goes, Bil Jee is Bil Jee. It’s a finger jab. You can use it to parry for your next Sut Choy/ Chum Choy, or try to drive it in your opponent’s armpit, or strike them in the eye, or do a thousand different things with it…You can change it into a fist, you can use it to thrust your opponent away in the clinch…
3) BUT, in the form it’s a Finger Jab, not an “all applications apply” Godsend.
You are right about my inference.
4) I am just used to most saying this isn’t this and that isn’t that because it isn’t CLC Purebred Pedigree Hong Kong Pak Mei TM Inc…
That is good if you dissect my points. That is good if I dissect your points. I asked if anyone trained Chi Gung.
5) You said that you did with Jik Bo, but that Jik Bo is Jik Bo…
And you are right. What I am getting out of my training is different than what you are getting, and vice versa. I gain something you don’t, you gain something I don’t. Everyday this occurs, with every fleeting moment of our lives as humans.
It isn’t a question of you wanting my Chi Gung. It is a question of you knowing Chi Gung. Jik Bo isn’t Chi Gung.
6) Chi Gung isn’t built into those forms.
Chi Gung is Chi Gung. Don’t you think that your Grandmaster CLC studied Chi Gung? Don’t you think it would help you?
7)And why is horse stance and extended unrealistic stance?
8) Guangzhou Bak Mei uses it in training their Jik Bo right?[/QUOTE]
OK, point by point:-
1) As example TTFC cannot be explained in written words whatever the format.
2) I didn’t state that. You did.
3) You are incorrect. It is NOT only a finger jab in the Cheung Lai Chuen Pak Mei set Jik Bou.
4) Why is it that you think that people say such things?
5) I said that it is intergral.
- Yes it is.
7) Because it is an unrealistic extended stance. You say that you spar. Do you ever use a horse stance in this sparring?
8) I have no idea. Do they? If so then as I have previously explained it is not the same Jik Bou that I practice.
-
Sure it can. Heell, I’ll explain it in a symbol…FCTT= +
-
I never said I don’t understand Chi Gung. (Joke, just funny how you wrote).
-
Okay, so it’s a tiger claw? A Palm? A palm and a tiger claw? Why not make it a finger strike, palm, tiger claw, rip, and reverse phoenix all in one? What is it in 9 Step? Not a Bil Jee too? Most will say BIL JEE, And you know it…Enlighten us. What is it?
-
I know people say such things. It happens often. I have read it often.
-
Jik Bo isn’t Chi Gung.
-
How? What postures? What signs? What mudras? What alchemy?
-
“The horse is not a t and it’s not a v. You don’t attack, I won’t bash you.” If I hip throw you, and you don’t have enough sense to sink into your stance or somesuch, regardless of whatever stance you want to call it, good luck! If you spar, you use “horse stance” or some variation thereof. It just won’t look like a static picture. Metaphors…
-
Yes, they do! Then yall have different Jik Bos…
[QUOTE=TAO YIN;1002518]1. Sure it can. Heell, I’ll explain it in a symbol…FCTT= +
-
I never said I don’t understand Chi Gung. (Joke, just funny how you wrote).
-
Okay, so it’s a tiger claw? A Palm? A palm and a tiger claw? Why not make it a finger strike, palm, tiger claw, rip, and reverse phoenix all in one? What is it in 9 Step? Not a Bil Jee too? Most will say BIL JEE, And you know it…Enlighten us. What is it?
-
I know people say such things. It happens often. I have read it often.
-
Jik Bo isn’t Chi Gung.
-
How? What postures? What signs? What mudras? What alchemy?
-
“The horse is not a t and it’s not a v. You don’t attack, I won’t bash you.” If I hip throw you, and you don’t have enough sense to sink into your stance or somesuch, regardless of whatever stance you want to call it, good luck! If you spar, you use “horse stance” or some variation thereof. It just won’t look like a static picture. Metaphors…
-
Yes, they do! Then yall have different Jik Bos…[/QUOTE]
-
You have proved yourself empirically incorrect, thank you for saving me the effort.
-
I think you will find that which I have written is funny.
-
See 1. above. Listing more words in a row isn’t helping your ‘argument’.
The fact here is you don’t know and I do.
You really want to be enlightened? Really? Then go and find a Pak Mei class * Easy. -
So, you don’t have an opinion as to why then, you just ‘see’ and base arguments over the internet with random strangers on what you have seen in pixels without making an actual opinion as to what you have seen or why? Strange behaviour that, now I am the one who is confused.
-
Yet again you see I said something very very simple (allow me to refresh the memory “it is integral” ) and you reply to it with something seemingly unrelated to the very point I made.
-
What on earth are you talking about now? Signs, postures, alchemy? Have we taken a diversion to a Harry Potter movie? Do tell.
-
I am entirely unsure as to how to answer your discourse related to this point without appearing to be two things 1) impolite and 2) an armchair hardcase !
Your choice, you decide. Happy to oblige. -
Clearly.
- A Cheung Lai Chuen Pak Mei class
This is an internet forum and as such, it is a discussion forum so when one CHOOSES to participate one uses words ( shocking revelation, yes I know).
Telling people to train is NOT discussing nor is saying that someone is mistaken, wrong or mislead and NOT explaining why.
Since no one is FORCED to discuss ANYTHING it means that when one chooses to involved themselves in a discussion they should DISCUSS not demean.
So, to keep it simple, discuss or don’t, but don’t derail threads with “I have the real insert TCMA training but I won’t tell you what it is” crap, not here.
Don’t want to share or discuss? fine, DON’T, just keep out of the discussion.
A message from your friendly neighborhood moderator.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1002737]This is an internet forum and as such, it is a discussion forum so when one CHOOSES to participate one uses words ( shocking revelation, yes I know).
Telling people to train is NOT discussing nor is saying that someone is mistaken, wrong or mislead and NOT explaining why.
Since no one is FORCED to discuss ANYTHING it means that when one chooses to involved themselves in a discussion they should DISCUSS not demean.
So, to keep it simple, discuss or don’t, but don’t derail threads with “I have the real insert TCMA training but I won’t tell you what it is” crap, not here.
Don’t want to share or discuss? fine, DON’T, just keep out of the discussion.
A message from your friendly neighborhood moderator.[/QUOTE]
You complain that I demean, that I derail and that I come here with crap.
This is friendly neighborhood moderation is it?
As it happens I do ‘have’ real Pak Mei, as do one or two other posters on here (Lau, Olaf, Yum Cha and Tiger on duty for example) and I have been quite open as to what it is. Perhaps more controversially also as to what it is not.
Yet all I am doing is to demean, derail etc according to you.
Sorry those above if I have chosen to name you without it being your wish for me to do so but you know what, sometimes there is standing up and being counted.
OK, Mr Friendly moderator fine. I got your message.
Lai See,
-
So it’s a Leopard Fist? Is it Bil Jee or not? And in Gau Bo Tui? What is it in the poem? Seeing as how you are so open as to what it is…
-
I do have an opinion why. Because SOME people think that if it isn’t CLC Hong Kong Bak Mei, if it is from Har Hon Hung, or whoever else, it has nothing to do with Bak Mei Kung Fu and its principles. This concept beats the heell out of me.
-
Jik Bo is for basic fighting. It isn’t designed to cultivate Chi. Sprinting is integral to Bak Mei.
-
These are basic concepts of Chi Gung. Go to Shaolin and ask one of the monks why they chant, and have for however long. CLC learned from a Monk right?
-
Copout…
-
Yes clearly. You don’t practice the horse in your Jik Bo like Guangzhou Bak Mei does. Ask Yum Cha!
What is the real Bak Mei? What they practice in Guangzhou, Fatsan, Hong Kong? What line do you come from? Who is your teacher?
[QUOTE=Lai See;1002746]You complain that I demean, that I derail and that I come here with crap.
This is friendly neighborhood moderation is it?
As it happens I do ‘have’ real Pak Mei, as do one or two other posters on here (Lau, Olaf, Yum Cha and Tiger on duty for example) and I have been quite open as to what it is. Perhaps more controversially also as to what it is not.
Yet all I am doing is to demean, derail etc according to you.
Sorry those above if I have chosen to name you without it being your wish for me to do so but you know what, sometimes there is standing up and being counted.
OK, Mr Friendly moderator fine. I got your message.[/QUOTE]
I am glad that you got my message, which means I won’t need to repeat it again and since it was direct to EVERYONE in general ( I am a tad tired of people coming into DISCUSSION forums and NOT discussing anything other than HINTS of thier supposed uber-knowledge), I hope that all got the message too.
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1002755]I am glad that you got my message, which means I won’t need to repeat it again and since it was direct to EVERYONE in general ( I am a tad tired of people coming into DISCUSSION forums and NOT discussing anything other than HINTS of thier supposed uber-knowledge), I hope that all got the message too.
:D[/QUOTE]
Fair enough.
Allow me to partially explain.
I am not going to type a full descriptive technical move by move by application analysis of a part of the set in particular on this discussion forum. If this then smacks of hinting, and I can in a way see that it may indeed do so then I apologise but I would hope that you would understand my reticence to do so.
It has never been done yet for any of the four core sets and I don’t imagine that in my lifetime it will be. Even the photgraphs in Un Ho Bun’s book are virtually impossible to mimic as those that know the set will understand, and those who have tried to follow it just from the pictures will also understand.
Good or bad, well that’s up to the individual to decide, but the point about my training comment is that Pak Mei is one of those arts that is literally impossible to even gain a flavour for through words. You really do, - old chestnut that this may be - , have to see it and feel it.
One of difficulties I face in the discussion in this particular context is that the exact differences between for example the Pak Mei part of another art and the Pak Mei in and of itself is that it IS so very very different. You will have to take my word here that the reason for discussion about those differences is literally nothing whatsoever about chest beating who ‘has’ the real deal.
It is highlighted in the ‘chi gung’ issue. One voice says one thing and the other says the polar opposite.
An interesting read can be had on these very issues within a couple of recent books; Yandle’s Pak Mei : A Dedication, and S.L. Fung’s : Pak Mei.
[QUOTE=Lai See;1002763]Fair enough.
Allow me to partially explain.
I am not going to type a full descriptive technical move by move by application analysis of a part of the set in particular on this discussion forum. If this then smacks of hinting, and I can in a way see that it may indeed do so then I apologise but I would hope that you would understand my reticence to do so.
It has never been done yet for any of the four core sets and I don’t imagine that in my lifetime it will be. Even the photgraphs in Un Ho Bun’s book are virtually impossible to mimic as those that know the set will understand, and those who have tried to follow it just from the pictures will also understand.
Good or bad, well that’s up to the individual to decide, but the point about my training comment is that Pak Mei is one of those arts that is literally impossible to even gain a flavour for through words. You really do, - old chestnut that this may be - , have to see it and feel it.
One of difficulties I face in the discussion in this particular context is that the exact differences between for example the Pak Mei part of another art and the Pak Mei in and of itself is that it IS so very very different. You will have to take my word here that the reason for discussion about those differences is literally nothing whatsoever about chest beating who ‘has’ the real deal.
It is highlighted in the ‘chi gung’ issue. One voice says one thing and the other says the polar opposite.
An interesting read can be had on these very issues within a couple of recent books; Yandle’s Pak Mei : A Dedication, and S.L. Fung’s : Pak Mei.[/QUOTE]
I can respect that view and when put this way, I agree with it.
Perhaps I am a bit “scarred” by the fact that too many here try to hide behind their animity to make themselves seem more than they are.
I didn’t mean to offend you, I just wanted to take a stand on an issue that tends to plague our beloved TCMA’s.
Power generation or power cultivation
Lai See,
Pak Mei releases energy via the internal. The HHBB posture, due to pulling in of the stomach brings the organs close to the spine, as we use the spine to relay and magnify the energy. Now the spine pulls energy from the a)organs b) dan tian? I have heard both! Which is right and which is wrong, thats for you to decide as I’ve come to my own reality. Also, it helps to mention that the posture activates an internal pump, of which it is said that we have three. Which internal pump does it activate?
Now, I understand that PM is an internal/external art and I present no arguement to that, but to say that PM has internal development like an internal art is wrong.
In order to fully develope your internal you needs meds. Its like trying to develope sticky hands without some type of chi sao or just doing chi sao to the air.
Understand, that the principles that govern PM is nothing new. All styles of southern mantis follow the same principles as PM, yet they have chi gung. Shhhh, Tai Chi shares some principles with PM and they have chi gungs.
Again, I’m not saying that PM has no internal. What I am saying, is that from my experience PM lacks on internal developement. Also, to consider Jik Bo as a chi gung is not 100% correct.
How many Iron palm methods does your school train? Does your school train iron jacket or does it go beyond that?
Bless,
buby
[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1002766]I can respect that view and when put this way, I agree with it.
Perhaps I am a bit “scarred” by the fact that too many here try to hide behind their animity to make themselves seem more than they are.
I didn’t mean to offend you, I just wanted to take a stand on an issue that tends to plague our beloved TCMA’s.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for your honesty and for your answer.