was haltet ihr davon?
Folgede Text habe ich gerade gefunden.
Ich würde sehr über eure Meinuge freuen - selbst werde ich aber keine abgeben.
"As you all might have guessed by now, I am a practitioner of Chinese martial arts in general, but my specialty is Wing Chun Kuen. Over the past few years, Wing Chun has gotten into the magazines as a fighting art and from the fame it received as the mother art of Bruce Lee’s Jeet Kune Do. Since the death of Yip Man in 1972, there has emerged a growing popularity with the art, and a number of prominent instructors promoting the art internationally. Wing Chun Kuen has attracted perhaps hundreds of thousands of practitioners learning this art.
Unfortunately, the system is sick. Two rival groups within the same system have had a major falling out. Grandmasters of these two systems have been involved in public petty squabbles and politics and publicly noted in newspaper and magazine articles throughout the world. Some of their students and grandstudents have been involved in actual brawls. Destructive “kicking down” of rival schools in Germany have occurred. I don’t think there has ever been a Chinese martial art enshrouded with so much controversy. We have lost face throughout the martial arts world with the bickering and infighting. Others laugh and ridicule the Wing Chun family members for fighting amongst ourselves. And why shouldn’t they?
The Choy Lay Fut people have many divisions: Hung Sing, Bak Sing, Hung Sing (different Chinese characters), and the Chan family, yet they all get along, and they all recognize the members of Chan Heung’s family as successors of the art. Taijiquan has many systems, including Chen, Yang, Sun, Wu, Wu Jian Quan, and others, yet they all get along in harmony. Why is it that Wing Chun Kuen brethren are going around beating each other up?
The answer may be in egos and ignorance. My grandmaster, Yip Man, when he was alive, customized his teaching based on each student’s body structure, size, abilities and emotional make up. Yip Man was also very clever and made each student feel as if though they were special and he disclosed the “true” teachings to only that student. Wing Chun was introduced in Hong Kong in 1949, and it’s reputation was built upon many of the early students engaging in streetfights and through challenge matches with other systems. This made the Wing Chun name very popular and attracted thousands of students to Yip Man and what was later called the Ving Tsun (Wing Chun) Athletic Association. Many of Yip Man’s students believed he was the only grandmaster of Wing Chun from China, and his was the best. Having never heard or seen other variations of Wing Chun as there are in China and other areas of South East Asia, it’s easy to conclude that. However, it’s interesting to note there are many systems of Wing Chun, and some do not even share the same lineage or techniques in common with the art passed down by Yip Man.
I personally had read magazines from Hong Kong called “New Martial Hero” in the 1970’s that had articles on different branches of Wing Chun. There was Siu Lam Weng Chun of Fung Siu Ching that looked like Shaolin and famous for their 6.5 point staff. There was a variation of Wing Chun with more than 10 hand sets and unusual weapons called Pao Fa Lien. There was the Wing Chun of Yuen Kay Shan, a close friend of Yip Man, practiced and popularized in Guang Zhou, the capital city of Canton province. Yuen Kay Shan had a brother, Yuen Chai Wan, who taught his Wing Chun in Vietnam. Another lineage of Wing Chun had no forms, but was taught in separate San Sao (Loose hands) sequences allegedly passed down from Leung Jan in Gu Lao village after he retired. There were also “Hung Gar-like” forms of Wing Chun that were popular in Nanyang (South China Sea) area of Singapore and Malaysia. And there are perhaps more underground, and not popular at all.
I was fortunate to begin my study of Yip Man Wing Chun in 1974 and I was introduced to Yuen Kay Shan and Gu Lao Wing Chun systems in 1980. I later sought out William Cheung and what he taught as “Traditional Wing Chun”. I had always looked to these variations as branches of the same tree. I treated all Wing Chun members, Yip Man system or not, as a family member. Perhaps I was more open minded than other individuals as my experience was broader. In 1987, I traveled to Hong Kong and Taiwan to learn more about Wing Chun from the senior students of Yip Man and paid my respects as a junior member of the art. In 1988, I found Hawkins Cheung and was very satisfied with the teachings he imparted to me, so much that I moved from New York City to Los Angeles to study more with him. From my trip to Hong Kong, I had found that typically in the Yip Man system, each instructor taught his own art the way that Yip Man taught that individual and that these were becoming branches of Yip Man Wing Chun. Many have suggested that as Yip Man had not named a successor publicly prior to his passing, this lead to a struggle of power amongst the students of Yip Man.
With the disciples of Yip Man splintering off into “new” lineage’s and branches, each with purportedly differences and unique characteristics, the petty squabbles, fights and politics should be avoided. After all, we are all part of one family - the Wing Chun family. To say one’s art is more traditional than the other, or that another’s art has been modified is almost ridiculous. Wing Chun is both traditional and modified, and each art has it’s own interpretation, traditions, footwork, techniques, forms and weaponry. Many have not looked at Wing Chun Kuen as a whole, rather, preferring to be a frog in the bottom of a well, thinking that is all to the world. If you do one lineage, open your mind and see that there is more to our beautiful art than just your lineage. It’s a beautiful world out there, with relatives and friends waiting to be met and made. People who can help you grow and learn, and solve the “mysteries” that people with limited knowledge have held back as “secrets”.
Many of the different lineage’s history and traditions were compiled in a book by Rene Ritchie, Y. Wu, and myself in the book, “Complete Wing Chun”, just recently published by Charles E. Tuttle Co., Inc. I can tell the reader that compiling this book was a labor of love and our gift to the Wing Chun world to begin the healing process of a much misunderstood art. Also with the efforts of Marty Goldberg and Robert Gillispie through the Wing Chun Mailing List, an outstanding forum of exchange amongst multi-lineages, we have begun to speak amongst each other as family members should. Rene Ritchie’s Wing Chun Kuen webpages (located at www.WingChunKuen) is also influential in spreading and disseminating information about lessor known branches of Wing Chun, hosting the Yuen Kay Shan Wing Chun webpages, the Gu Lao Wing Chun Association Webpages, the Chi Sim Ving Tsun Webpages and a number of other related arts. It is my hope that our “Tong Mun” (System Members) can open up and make the petty squabbles a thing of the past, and allow the healing of our art to take place. Let’s hold our heads up high with dignity and heal the injuries of the past."
by Robert Chu
Zitat von *DUX*
Na? Paradox? Nein, ist es nicht. Es ist klar, das wir alle Wing Chun machen und das auch noch nach Variationen/Interpretationen, aber ich kann (so bin ich nunmal) sagen, dass diese Variation kein Wing Chun ist, wenn da etwas gemacht wird, was meinen Vorstellungen vom "richtigen Wing Chun" nicht entspricht. Ich bin da ziemlich straight und sage: Das find ich Scheisse! Dafür muss ich nicht Jahrelang VT machen oder sonst was. Wing Chun soll so und so sein und diese Eigenschaften machen Wing chun aus. Dann müssen die genannten Dinge auch perfektionistisch umgesetzt werden. Und wer das nicht tut, macht in meinen Aufgen keins oder nur schlechtes VT. 