Siu Bot Gwa

[futsaowingchun]

I can only give you my opinion of what I think. this is an oral transmittion given to me so the information is not coming from me.I'm only recording and writing it down. the Gu Yee Kuen is not a style but a vast body of kung fu which include medicine,meditation and martial arts. Henry leung had many skills.this much I know because he was my sifu.and many of those skills had nothing to do with Wing Chun. What he did was reformulate what he learnt from his teacher and taught what people wanted to learn at the time what was wing chun. most of his first students ,in the early years came from Duncan Leung. when Duncan left NYC most of his student went to Henry to continue their wing chun training. What henry did was wing chun in every sence. If you knew him you would know. All the ideas and concepts are the same. Wing Chun is only a small branch connected to the trunk. So its all the same. there is no wing chun. It's an illusion.


Hmm, out of curiosity, if the origins of this style are said to have pre-dated Shaolin & even to be a sub-set of an Internal Taoist system, how exactly is this Wing Chun?
Most lineages trace their lineages back to the 1800's, with a few stating that theirs are from the 1600's. So what makes it Wing Chun in other words? Because it has SLT/CK/BG? The history section leaves many things to question, but that's good in a way.[/QUOTE]

 

[futsaowingchun]

Sources for any of this?

the siu bot qwa has nothing to do with this list

 

[futsaowingchun]

Kentucky

a bit far from me

 

[futsaowingchun]

Really? Wow, hadn't heard that before. Interesting. Where did you learn that or hear about it? Would like to know more...



What is a "subset"? How is that term defined? Like an add-on as you describe? Or something outside the "normal" curriculum of the three forms, jong, pole, knives etc?

henry and duncan are not really brothers they new each other and where in business together a long time ago but where not related. duncan and henry wing chun are very different. the complete opposite to eachothers

 

[dlcox]

the siu bot qwa has nothing to do with this list

From my understanding the Xiao Ba Gua Quan (Siu Bot Qwa Kuen) as stated by your lineage dates back to Miao Xin (Miu Shun) the teacher of Yan Ni (Yim Yi) the father of Yan Yong Chun (Yim Wing Chun). Who allegedly taught it to your Shigong. If we are to believe this story then the Xiao Ba Gua Quan is a remnant of old Yong Chun before the formalization of the knife and pole sets. There is another branch unrelated to yours that also has a 4th form called Xiao Ba Gua/Ba Gua Quan and they trace their origins to Fang Shao Qing. A generally accepted lineage of early Yong Chun ancestors is:

Wu Mei - Miao Xin - Yan Ni - Yan Yong Chun - Liang Bo Liu - Liang Yi Tai, Huang Hua Bao, Da Hua Mian Jin, Yi Jin etc. who then passed the art onto individuals such as Fang Shao Qing, Liang Zan etc.

If we count Miao Xin as 1st generation, Liang Zan & Fang Shao Qing would be 6th generation. All of the sets and forms that I listed trace back to at least the 6th generation. They were either created at this time or passed on to them, either way, since the 6th generation is considered the last of the developer/ancestral generation, the sets & forms are also considered ancestral. If your version of Xiao Ba Gua Quan is not catalogued within this time frame it can only be considered modern or not of Yong Chun origin. So the long and the short of it is.....Is it of Yong Chun origin? If so is it classified as ancestral or modern?

I don't mean to come off as insensensitive, but there are alot of holes in the Fut Sao history that come off as promoting itself as "Older" and "More Genuine" with the hard to believe story of Gao Jih having studied with Miao Xin. This puts Henry Leung as 3rd generation while an individual like Huang Hua Bao is at 5th generation and Liang Zan at 6th generation, Ye Wen at 8th generation and etc.... See what I'm getting at, Gao Jih and Liang Zan were born around the same time. I'm not saying the story isn't true but there are alot of questions that need answered. One of the big ones being that there is no reliable evidence that the 3 standard forms (Xiao Lian Tou, Chen Qiao and Biao Zhi) exsisted prior to Huang Hua Bao, whom legend states, composed them. If this is factual how does a lineage not associated with him come to possess them? Older lines not associated with him have forms like San Bei Fo, Shiyi Shou, Hua Quan, Jian Zhang etc. which are composites of concepts found in all 3 sets. As I said I don't mean to come off as insensitive or rude it's simply a tough pill to swallow. I'm truely interested in your system, just looking for clarification.

 

[dlcox]

Forgot to add this one, Ba Shi Dan Da (8 Techniques Single Hit). This is a common Jibengong found in many branches, with slight variences. Some Ye Wen lines still use it, can also be found in Ruan Qi Shan, Ruan Ji Yun, Yu Cai and Wu Zhong Su branches. A good simple set of Sanshi to relay/introduce basic Yong Chun concepts and structure.

There are certainly other Sanshi sets and more forms in the Yong Chun pantheon, these are simply the ones I was able to trace back to at least the 6th generation some went back to the 5th. Other sets like Bai He Tan Shui Quan (White Crane Testing the Waters Fist), Chang Long Hang Yue Quan (Long Dragon Travels the Moon), Cao family sets and Bao Hua Lian sets are suspect and require further investigation as research has not been able to verify the bulk of these forms as exsisting prior to 1930. This doesn't mean that these sets aren't "Authentic' or useful or that the others are more "Pure" and "Original" just simply that things evolve according to need and influence. All of the sets are just a glimpse into the "Toolbox" and genetic make-up of Yong Chun. It's truely a very vast art with just as much variation as Hongjia Quan and all its lineages, some of which by the way look in no ways related, but truely do stem from the same well.

If one can let go of their predjudices, preconceptions and ethnocentic views, they will see that Yong Chun is a very deep well with great variences in history, tradition, philosophy, theory, mechanics and approach. No one line is the standard or the represenative, we are all one family, like it or not. If we can take the blinders off we may actually be able to learn something from one another or at the very least an appreciation for what others do. This has to start with humility, subjugation of ego and political agenda, tolerance, acceptance and truthfulness. Approach each other with this attitude and differences of opinion won't be such a negative factor.

 

[Kwan Sau]

The siu bot gwa has spinning foot work in it where you turn your back to your opponent. Would a Ip man wc man do this?

I have heard som YMWC families do spin. How/when they would 'spin' is another story. But regardless, thanks for this info.
So, if I take this 'spin' and also from what I read in WCI magazine on Siu Bot Gwa I can get a better picture of what it is. If I recall, you had several pictures of you and your student in that magazine, showing a step involving one leg/foot crossed with the other correct?
Thanks again.

 

[Kwan Sau]

...there is no central point as it in flux.

Futsao, do you mean there is no set geometric pattern to the siu bot gwa(?)

 

[Kwan Sau]

Henry leung had many skills.this much I know because he was my sifu.and many of those skills had nothing to do with Wing Chun. What he did was reformulate what he learnt from his teacher and taught what people wanted to learn at the time what was wing chun. most of his first students ,in the early years came from Duncan Leung. when Duncan left NYC most of his student went to Henry to continue their wing chun training. What henry did was wing chun in every sence. All the ideas and concepts are the same.

Very interesting. Thx Futsao. I did not know this part. KPM in an earlier post mentioned something about Henry and Duncan possibly being related(?). Had you heard that before? Did Duncan and Henry ever exchange WC knowledge or were they just all business?
I wonder why Duncans NYC students went to Henry if there WC was so very different?

 

[Kwan Sau]

a bit far from me

Perhaps a halfway point can be arranged between you two and any other interested parties for a WC weekend getaway?

 

[Kwan Sau]

henry and duncan are not really brothers they new each other and where in business together a long time ago but where not related. duncan and henry wing chun are very different. the complete opposite to eachothers

Oh ok. Thx. Disregard this question in my other post to you. Thx.

 

[futsaowingchun]

I have heard som YMWC families do spin. How/when they would 'spin' is another story. But regardless, thanks for this info.
So, if I take this 'spin' and also from what I read in WCI magazine on Siu Bot Gwa I can get a better picture of what it is. If I recall, you had several pictures of you and your student in that magazine, showing a step involving one leg/foot crossed with the other correct?
Thanks again.

yes..there should be more pictures but only a few where accepted and the sequence of the pictures are wrong but you can at least get an idea.

 

[futsaowingchun]

Perhaps a halfway point can be arranged between you two and any other interested parties for a WC weekend getaway?

perhaps...contact me and we can discuss it.

 

[futsaowingchun]

Very interesting. Thx Futsao. I did not know this part. KPM in an earlier post mentioned something about Henry and Duncan possibly being related(?). Had you heard that before? Did Duncan and Henry ever exchange WC knowledge or were they just all business?
I wonder why Duncans NYC students went to Henry if there WC was so very different?

yes sure I have heard Duncan and Henry being related for the last 30 years. Since Duncan and Henry have the same surname and came from the same part of China they used to tell everyone they where brothers. People used to say Duncan taught Henry his Wing Chun,but that makes no sense as they had vastly different versions of Wing Chun. Henry pole and knife forms looked nothing like the Ip Man version and I have never seen anything even close to it,so I would say it comes from a different source. I'm sure that Henry and Duncan exchanged some knowledge. When your friends and both are martial artists its only natural,but to what extent i don't know.

 

[futsaowingchun]

Very interesting. Thx Futsao. I did not know this part. KPM in an earlier post mentioned something about Henry and Duncan possibly being related(?). Had you heard that before? Did Duncan and Henry ever exchange WC knowledge or were they just all business?
I wonder why Duncans NYC students went to Henry if there WC was so very different?

"

I wonder why Duncans NYC students went to Henry if there WC was so very different?"

Well this is a long time ago.Back then not many wing chun where around not like today. But Henry was at that time a very skillful martial artists.When I met him I was very impressed with his skills. One thing About Henry he would chi sao with anyone who came to his school,most wc sifu wont do that they will let their stainingudent do it and he will watch. Henry was very hands one always training with all his students.​

 

[futsaowingchun]

Futsao, do you mean there is no set geometric pattern to the siu bot gwa(?)

No,what I mean is the central point can change.

The footwork is simple,a square inside a circle. every time you step around your opponent(in a circular fashion) you hit one one side of the square.so it takes 4 steps to make a complete 360 degrees to make one pass. this is one type of stepping patterns there are others. what makes it wing chun is you keep the facing principles and the centerline intact. this does not change. you at times temp discard this.

 

[Kwan Sau]

No,what I mean is the central point can change.

The footwork is simple,a square inside a circle. every time you step around your opponent(in a circular fashion) you hit one one side of the square.so it takes 4 steps to make a complete 360 degrees to make one pass. this is one type of stepping patterns there are others. what makes it wing chun is you keep the facing principles and the centerline intact. this does not change. you at times temp discard this.

Ok, thanks. That helps a bit.
Is your sifu (Henry) still alive and teaching or...?

 

[Eric_H]

These Sanshi methods are said to have come from Liang Li Tai (Leung Lee Dai) whose material was used by Liang Zan (Leung Jan) to create the Gulao (Koo Lo) method. Much of this material is still contained in it's loose form in various branches of Liang Zan (Leung Jan) and Ye wen (Yip Man) Yong Chun.

That's the first I've heard them credited to Leung Yi Tai, not saying it's not possible, just that I haven't heard it. Where'd this info come from?

No it's not, there is no such beast, the terms "Beautiful" & "Praise" were used interchangeably throughout the history of the art even by members of the same lineage. It's simply preference of verbage. What many call "Weng Chun" consider it a different art, it is not. Fang Shao Qing (Fung Siu Ching) is a legitimate ancestor of the art and celebrated by many lineages of Yong Chun, most notebly the Ruan (Yuen) family who were direct inheritors of his art. Fang Shao Qing learned from Da Hua Mian Jin (Dai Wah Min Jan) who trained alongside of Huang Hua Bao (Wong Wah Bo) and Liang Li Tai (Leung Lee Dai) under Liang Bo Liu (Leung Bok Chao), the husband of Yan Yong Chun (Yim Wing Chun). The Dang (Dong), Tang and Lou (Lo) families may have embellished their method with arts such as Hongjia, but they are legitimately a part of the Yong Chun family, no different than Chen (Chan) or Cao (Cho) families or anyone else that descended from Liang Bo Liu (Leung Bok Chao). The lines stemming from Liang Zan are simply the most popular, especially Ye Wen (Yip Man) line, but should not be considered the standard for all Yong Chun branches.

I've trained both, they're different down to the very core. The training methods, body framework and principles and concepts don't match in a significant way. There was some intermingling in the Leung Bik/Yip Man timeframe, but I've not seen anything credible before that.

And if you dig a bit further you'll see that there are many differnt flavors of pudding based on the same recipie. Pick the one you like, because one isn't better than another. It all comes down to personal preference.

No, it all comes down to the core principals, concepts and body engine that drives WC vs any other martial art.

 

[futsaowingchun]

From my understanding the Xiao Ba Gua Quan (Siu Bot Qwa Kuen) as stated by your lineage dates back to Miao Xin (Miu Shun) the teacher of Yan Ni (Yim Yi) the father of Yan Yong Chun (Yim Wing Chun). Who allegedly taught it to your Shigong. If we are to believe this story then the Xiao Ba Gua Quan is a remnant of old Yong Chun before the formalization of the knife and pole sets. There is another branch unrelated to yours that also has a 4th form called Xiao Ba Gua/Ba Gua Quan and they trace their origins to Fang Shao Qing. A generally accepted lineage of early Yong Chun ancestors is:

Wu Mei - Miao Xin - Yan Ni - Yan Yong Chun - Liang Bo Liu - Liang Yi Tai, Huang Hua Bao, Da Hua Mian Jin, Yi Jin etc. who then passed the art onto individuals such as Fang Shao Qing, Liang Zan etc.

If we count Miao Xin as 1st generation, Liang Zan & Fang Shao Qing would be 6th generation. All of the sets and forms that I listed trace back to at least the 6th generation. They were either created at this time or passed on to them, either way, since the 6th generation is considered the last of the developer/ancestral generation, the sets & forms are also considered ancestral. If your version of Xiao Ba Gua Quan is not catalogued within this time frame it can only be considered modern or not of Yong Chun origin. So the long and the short of it is.....Is it of Yong Chun origin? If so is it classified as ancestral or modern?

I don't mean to come off as insensensitive, but there are alot of holes in the Fut Sao history that come off as promoting itself as "Older" and "More Genuine" with the hard to believe story of Gao Jih having studied with Miao Xin. This puts Henry Leung as 3rd generation while an individual like Huang Hua Bao is at 5th generation and Liang Zan at 6th generation, Ye Wen at 8th generation and etc.... See what I'm getting at, Gao Jih and Liang Zan were born around the same time. I'm not saying the story isn't true but there are alot of questions that need answered. One of the big ones being that there is no reliable evidence that the 3 standard forms (Xiao Lian Tou, Chen Qiao and Biao Zhi) exsisted prior to Huang Hua Bao, whom legend states, composed them. If this is factual how does a lineage not associated with him come to possess them? Older lines not associated with him have forms like San Bei Fo, Shiyi Shou, Hua Quan, Jian Zhang etc. which are composites of concepts found in all 3 sets. As I said I don't mean to come off as insensitive or rude it's simply a tough pill to swallow. I'm truely interested in your system, just looking for clarification.

acher
e aw
I know there are holes in the history of Fut Sao. Its mostly been passed down to us not by documents but by stories from teacher to student. We do have all the forms in fut sao intact. So the best way is to just study it and decide for your self. Sadly, Henry Leung has passes away and only myself and a few continue to teach his art. How and why Xun Yun learned the Gu Yee Kuen has never been written down. I have heard the story but I wont speak of it. I dont think most people will believe it anyway so better to just let it fade away.

 

[kung fu fighter]

From my research the siu bot gwa footworks are hidden in all authentic wck linages, but are never explained to the same extent as in Fut Sao wck. So many never fully grasp the full understanding of how they are applied.

There is another branch unrelated to yours that also has a 4th form called Xiao Ba Gua/Ba Gua Quan and they trace their origins to Fang Shao Qing.

Which branch of wing chun are you referring to? Is there a link to this linage of wing chun?