Yip Man's multiple forms(?)

[Juany118]

Part of the Confucian tradition is cultural conservatism, especially the concept of filial piety or respect, obedience, and devotion to your family, your parents and ancestors. Unlike the militaristic model of Japanese and Korean martial arts, Chinese martial arts were taught according to the family model, and bringing honor and respect to your kung-fu family, your sifu and si-gung are of great importance.

Consequently, after the passing of one's sifu, when great masters inevitably adapt and evolve the arts they have been taught, rather than proudly proclaim their innovations as we tend to do today in the West, the traditional confucian gentleman would respectfully claim that any apparent "innovations" were actually part of the traditional system all along.

So a modern Westernized master tends to take personal credit for innovation, perhaps even proclaiming that he has created a new, improved system (JKD?) while a more Confucian minded master (or one using tradition and purported "authenticity" as a marketing ploy) will claim that any novelty in their instruction is in actuality the "authentic" or "traditional" version.

Accordingly, when Grandmaster Yip over his long teaching career tried out different approaches with his students, he would have claimed that it was all original Wing Chun as he was taught by Chan Wah Shun and Ng Chun So, or perhaps by the mysterious figure of Leung Bic. He never claimed to be inventing a new version of his own. Similarly, his students never admit inventing new approaches themselves.

Even my old Chinese Sifu justified any changes he personally made by pointing out that they either came directly from GM Yip or from earlier versions of what GM taught in Fo'shan. It seems that not one of the major figures in the Yip Man lineage takes personal credit for the variance in their teaching. It's always claimed to be traditional.

Agreed. My point was to say he wouldn't "master hop" to other Lineages. What he changed he changed due to his own experience and then simply said "this is the WC I learned." (That is if you were referring to me, could be you were just more eloquently making the same point )

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk

 

[wckf92]

Yuen Kay San CK:

Yiu Choi CK:

Yip Man CK (Foshan version)

Yip Man CK (Leung Sheung version)

Yip Man CK (Chu Sheung TIn)

Awesome! Thx Marnetmar!

 

[Kenpoguy123]

Through reading and searching this forum...it appears the consensus is YM interacted with other lineage masters in the dai duk lan (spelling?) and most likely picked up other aspects of WC from different families (i.e. YKS? Pan Nam? Weng Chun? etc?) Perhaps things like pole forms, knife work, gerk jong/post training etc?

But, did he intentionally pass down different versions of the same form? For an example, there are short versions of the pole form, and longer versions. Is this YM teaching selective students different things? Or is it YM passing down forms as he was tinkering with them throughout his career?

I've read on here and other forums that YM knew A LOT, but ultimately wanted to strip the system down to what it is today. So, would an example be: perhaps YM knew a longer pole set (say, perhaps like the Tang Yik pole?) but stripped out what he wanted, and only taught his 'creation'?

I don't think there can be a definite answer it was such a long time ago that different legends and stories about who taught who or who taught what have been spread so no one knows the real truth anymore. I can't comment because I know next to nothing on wing chun but what I know of martial arts in general is the history often gets very distorted based on rumours and legends.