wing chun is about harmony and zen bushism, not being an asshole or giving the finger. You will not understand it until you understand this.
OK. I'll admit the posting was written a bit tongue in cheek. But this writer, "Zentelligent," is absolutely wrong. He could not possibly be more wrong.
Still, I did mis-speak in that posting. Wing chun in practice is not about being an asshole. It's about being a bigger asshole than the guy you're fighting. (Both guys in a fight are already assholes.)
Wing chun is most certainly NOT about harmony and Zen Buddhism, as "Zentelligent" suggests.You know why? Because the term "martial art" is a misnomer. There's no art to wing chun. Art is subjective. Art is Renoir and Picasso, and who can definitively determine which is better?
Wing chun is a fighting method. A fascinating, sophisticated fighting method, and if I say "my wing chun is better than yours," and you disagree, we can settle it definitively with a fight. The person who can walk away wins the argument. There's no subjectivity involved.
You want harmony? Go to therapy. (I hear it can do wonders.) You want Zen Buddhism? Go see a monk. You only want to get fit? Go to a gym or do some yoga. Self-discipline? Join the Marines. Self-confidence? Grow a set.
Wing chun will teach you to fight. To hit the other guy as many times as you can, as fast as you can, and as hard as you can, until the other guy falls down, while simultaneously keeping the other guy from hitting you. That's it. That's all. It's that simple.
In truth, Zentelligent's response is typical of those who are destroying the purity and beauty of the "martial arts." I can't tell you how enraged I get every time some talkinghead media idiot writes that "X style of martial arts is not about fighting or self defense. It's about self confidence/respect/discipline." Blah blah blah.
Every martial art started out as a fighting method. A bunch of guys wanted to NOT get killed or beat up and came up with a method that they tested, and if it worked, they survived to pass it down. There's no philosophy involved. There's nothing deeper than that.
What I just said about wing chun holds true for all "martial arts." It's just that wing chun is more honest about fighting being all about being an asshole, to such an extent that it comes out in our tactics and techniques. Name a style, and I can point to a bloody, violent origin. Tai Chih was developed to kill raiders and bandits. Shaolin quan was developed because monks were tired of being robbed. Karate? A peasant-class response to tyranny. Escrima? So Filipinos could kill invading Spaniards. Even judo, which thinks of itself as not that warlike, was developed with combat in mind. The idea behind judo was that jujitsu had become ineffective because they just sat around talking about their theoretically deadly techniques that they couldn't actually practice in a "live" setting. (That stuff about self cultivation is just what they told the public to assuage the government and get taxpayer funding.)
And, on a personal note to "Zentelligent": real Zen masters don't need to talk about how enlightened they are.
5 comments:
Right, you study TWC - if you come to California, i will explain it to you. - Zentelligent
You know something about TWC, but that is a modern iteration of wing chun - let me know if you want to know the real story - Zentelligent
Zentelligent is under the mistaken impression that I train “TWC” (by which I assume he means “Traditional Wing Chun” as taught by William Cheung.) In either case, here’s my answer:
Not knowing who you are, I see no reason why I should “come to California” to seek your wisdom about wing chun, when instead I can go to established authorities instead:my own sifu, Philip Nearing, or his sifu, Samuel Kwok, or even his sifu, Ip Ching.
As for the “real story” of historic wing chun (as opposed to Zentelligent's idea of "modern wing chun") – there is no confirmed “real story” of wing chun, but both the apocryphal and historical theories as to its origins support my assertion that wing chun and all martial arts are, at heart, about combat: hurting the other guy before he can hurt you, and doing so in a very very nasty way.
The apocryphal origin story of wing chun features a young girl who is taught a distilled version of the Shaolin-based martial arts by the legendary nun Ng Mui and streamlines it to incorporate such ideas as the centerline principle; not clashing force against force; and use of angling, deflection, sensitivity, and position to overcome superior force. At the core of the story is THIS: a young girl needed a combat system that would enable her to kick the snot out of a large, strong bandit who was trying to force her into an unwanted marriage. So from the very beginning, the art is about combat effectiveness – and more importantly, combat efficiency.
Historical research has shown that in fact, wing chun is an offshoot of Shaolin martial arts that was first developed—and used by—rebels who hoped to overthrow the invading Manchus and restore the Ming dynasty. One theory has it that wing chun was developed to be an art that those with no combat training could learn in a (relatively) short period of time and use to defeat Manchu invaders in combat. In particular, according to this theory, the art was developed to counter “classical” Shaolin kung fu, in which many Manchus had trained.
A secondary theory is that wing chun was developed by rebels for use in assassinations. Back in the days before sniper rifles, assassination was a matter of getting close to, say, a Manchu general, and stabbing him with something sharp and pointy. Wing chun was developed to help these assassins escape capture (which would lead to questioning, torture, and inevitable betrayal of key rebel secrets.) As the theory goes, this is why wing chun focuses more on close combat—upon discovery, most guards would try to capture an assassin alive for questioning. This requires them to get close to the assassin, and this is why wing chun was designed to be so fast and efficient—the longer it takes to fight off the first two guards, the more likely it is that you’ll be overwhelmed by the dozens of reinforcements that arrive later.
Regardless of which one you believe to be true, all three origin stories or theories have their basis in the need for a devastating combat system that enables the practitioner to kick ass, with prejudice, and to do it very quickly. There’s no Zen and no harmony involved in killing, or taking someone out--which is why, while I will concede that having a Zen mind might help during training, wing chun in application is meant to be mean, nasty and brutal.
And in closing, let me just add that in addition to matching the approach or philosophy of my sifu and my sigungs, my view correlates closely with the opinions of Wong Shun Leung, Hawkins Cheung, Bruce Lee, Duncan Leung, and plenty of other known wing chun master fighters.
I think they know better than you.
Post a Comment