加法或減法 Returning to the Original Spirit of Wing Chun
加法或減法 Returning to the Original Spirit of Wing Chun
加法或減法 - 回歸詠春拳的原創精神
作者: Alan C. Huang
在當今的社會有一個非常普遍的心態。這心態為 - 碩
大就是美，越多越好。此心態幾乎影響我們生活每一個層面。因此，我們希望有更多的我們認為美好一切。服裝和鞋子是越多越好。當我們有一輛車，我們還想再有
一輛車。當我們終於有一個房子，如果我們可以負擔得起，我們希望我們有第二個房子。錢更是多多益善了。我把這種類型的思考 - 「加法思維」。在武術界也不乏這種加法的思考。 招式學越多越好。 套路是學越多功夫應該越高。武術也覺得應該是學越多種實戰技擊越厲害。目前國際上相當流行的綜合格鬥術(MMA)可能是這種的思維最具代表性的範例。綜合格鬥術起初最常見是泰拳加巴西柔術，現在通常會再加摔角,柔道和拳擊。
我所要建議的是一個逆向思考方式「減法思維」- 小就是美，少便是多。首先讓談談我自己的經驗。當在讀研究所時，教授經常要求我們要交至少有四或五頁長的英文報告/作
業。起先，這對我來說很難。但是，後來就開始習慣了。畢業後，加入了一家國際公司。這家國際公司有一個規定那就是幾乎所有公司的書面溝通不能超過一頁。起
初，我很高興聽到這一頁的規定。因為我心想在學校我被訓練可以用英文隨便寫也可以寫很多頁。一頁實在是太容易了。結果，我錯了。大錯特錯!因為後來發現要將所有資料，數據，分析，結論與建議很清楚，詳細，合邏輯且具說服力地寫在一頁實在非常困難。結果是寫一頁所花的時間比寫五頁的多了許多倍。我只能保留重點並以清晰，簡潔文字直接地表達我的想法;不能洋洋灑灑長篇大論了。我必須使用「減法思維」。現在，讓我們想想在300年前，當詠春拳始祖在構思這系統時。不管你相信是誰創立詠春拳，無論是五枚師太或至善禪師，或是一群功夫非常高強的武林高手。身懷絕技，武學深厚的詠春拳始祖應該是用簡單，直接，高效率的精神去蕪存菁設計這門實用並可花費較少的學習時間的武術。也可說她/他/他
們是用「減法思維」。因此，詠春拳最後成了一門，沒有花巧動作實而不華的武術。詠春拳只包含三套拳，一套木人樁法和兩種武器。這種簡單性在中國功夫是罕見
的。其實，也有一種說法認為詠春最初只有一套拳。為了教學和學習的目的而分成「小念頭」「尋橋」「標指」三套拳。許多其他武術隨便就有兩倍或三倍以上的套
路。但是，我們的始祖相信概念，原理及以極少的招式千變萬化運用自如於各種情況才是更重要，更實際。其次，也聽說過一生只學過詠春一門武術的葉問宗師曾鼓勵他的一名徒弟看他是否可以讓詠春拳系統再更簡化。(註釋.1)這名徒弟畢其一生試圖使詠春拳系統再簡化。最終這名徒弟發現詠春拳已達到無懈可擊的完美境界。他們也用「減法思維」。
不是建議大家嘗試去簡化整個詠春拳系統，因為這工程太龐大而且可能無法完成。我所建議的是從「小」地方開始使用「減法思維」。或許以下是的一些例子可作為大家的出發點。套路每一個動作都做正確和到位了嗎？是否明白動作背後的含義或用法？黐手時有什麼壞習慣？兩隻手之間的距離是否過大？是否做太多追手？是否做太多無謂的繞來繞去或多餘的動作？所學到手法/招式是否練黐手時應用的出來? 如果不能，是否能找出原因是什麼？是否花太多時間在招式的漩渦裡 (如果他使用了招式A，那麼我將用招式B。然後，他使用招式C，我就用招式D....)，而不是學習如何更直接地攻擊對手的中線?打木人樁時動作是否太大？如何讓自己的訓練更有效率？是否真正 明白 老師教的一切？諸如此類仔細檢試自己所學的東西。
大多數人都知道想要致富基本上有兩種方法。第一種方法是開源 - 找更多機會賺更多的錢。第二種方法是結流 - 找更多辦法花更少錢。無論哪種方法，每個人都可以視情況選擇最適合他或她的方法。就如同一個人沒有足夠的錢想經由開源賺取更多的錢，如果一個人覺得他學的武術有不足的地方，添加其它武術來彌補也是很自然的事。這篇文章不是要評判哪種類型的思維比較好。只是提供另一不同的思考方式，希望它會給您一些意想不到的收穫。師叔Peterson認為師公黃淳樑有一句話最能代表黃系詠春拳，碰巧它也很適合做為本文的結語 -「簡化，而不要複雜化。」 ("Simplify, don't Complify!" 註釋2)
### (唉，又超過一頁。) ###
註釋1. 已不確定這名弟子是誰了。但是，如果沒記錯的話應該是梅逸師公。也許是葉問宗師的影響，從陳雄師傅傳下來的梅逸系統是極為樸實的。它著重於基本功和功力的訓練，完全沒有所謂的套招拆招之練習。陳雄師傅告訴我們梅逸師公曾說「光日字衝拳和正掌就足夠了。」
註釋2. 來源：“The Combat Philosophy of Wong Shun Leung” (黃淳梁的格鬥哲學), 作者David Peterson,第二版，第76頁。 師叔自創“Complify“單字來強調師公的觀點。
Returning to the original spirit of Wing Chun
Author: Alan C. Huang
In
our society, one mentality is very prevalent. So prevalent is
permeated in almost every fabric of our life. The mentality is "More is
better." Thus, we want more of almost everything. Clothing and shoes
are more the better. When we have a car, we want another one. When we
finally have a house, we wish we have a second house if we can afford
it. Money? Most definitely, we want more of it. Let’s call this type
of thinking - "Addition Thinking." We in the martial art worlds are not
immune to this type of thinking. We want more techniques and want to
learn different styles of martial arts. Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) which is all the rage right now, could be the poster child of this type of thinking.
What I
am proposing to Wing Chun people is a reverse thinking "Small is good;
Less is better." Let’s call it " Subtraction Thinking." Before
we go any further, let's go back to about 300 years ago when Wing Chun
was conceived. No matter who do you believe created Wing Chun, be it Ng
Mui or Chi Sim, or a group of very high level Kung Fu masters. Wing
Chun was designed to be a simple, direct and efficient system that takes
less time to learn yet every effective on the street. So our Wing Chun
forefathers used Subtraction Thinking. The end product contains only
three fist forms, one dummy form and two weapons. Actually, there is a
theory that originally there was only one fist form. The form was
divided into three for teaching and learning purposes. This type of
simplicity is uncommon in Kung Fu. Many other martial arts could have
easily twice or three times more forms than Wing Chun. But, our
forefathers believed concepts, principles and relatively few techniques
that could apply to a multitude of situations are more important. I
heard the Grandmaster Yip Man challenged one of his students to
simplify the Wing Chun system if it's possible. All through his life,
this student attempted to make the system yet the system is just perfect
he couldn't make it simpler. They also used Subtraction Thinking.
I am not suggesting that we all try to simplify the whole system. What I am suggesting is to look carefully into “small” details of what you have learned. Followings are some examples as starters. How
can we improve the way that we do the forms? Do we understand the
meaning and/or application for the movements in the forms? Do
we have any bad habits when doing Chi Sao? Do we chase hands too much
when doing Chi Sao? Do we roll too much and roll without any purposes?
Can we apply all the techniques we have learned in Chi Sao? If not, what are the reasons? Is the distance between our two hands are too wide during rolling? How can we make our training more efficient? Just a few examples here.
Most people know basically there are two approaches to get rich. First approach is find ways to make more money. Second approach is find ways to spend less money. Either approaches works. If one feels his Wing Chun is lacking, it's only natural for him to add other martial arts to compensate the perceived deficiency. This article is not to make a judgment on which type of thinking is better. I am just here to offer a different thinking and hopefully you would be surprised by what you get in return for your kung fu. Sisuk Peterson thinks a quote from Sigung Wong Shun Leung is best representative of the WSL system and I feel it is also fitting to summarize this article with the same quote - "Simplify, not Complify.1"
Note 1. Source: “The Combat Philosophy of Wong Shun Leung,” David Peterson. Second Edition, page 76. Sisuk Peterson invented the word “Complify” to get Sigung Wong’s viewpoint across in a way that people unlikely to forget.
回應(6)
Max於2011/03/03 11:37 回應
由繁化簡，去蕪存菁，真的是很難的學問，我發現我的基本並不紮實，所以自由黐手總是遇到障礙而無法有所謂的手法，是該回頭好好把過去學的重新練熟，看看能否更有深入的體會.........
alphahunter於2011/02/23 09:58 回應
Coach所論真的是珍貴之體會，在我們做投資跟交易的行業，這種現象也很明顯，遍尋各種投資技術及小道消息卻不問
學過或用過的方法有沒有確實執行到位、有沒有可以繼續研究改善的地方，搞得真正上場時招式很多，不僅耗人心神也耗人錢財。套句台灣電子業郭老闆的話"魔鬼
總是藏在細節裡"，唯有透過不斷改正藏在執行細節與心理層面的小錯誤，比較能獲得根本上的提升，講起來似乎是簡單的一個動作，但背後所經歷之細節的持續改
進與修正卻正是造就功夫的過程。
Mke
Mke
Coach H於2011/02/24 09:47回覆
Mike,
Thanks for sharing your experience in the investment industry. Yes, "the devil is in the detail."
Thanks for sharing your experience in the investment industry. Yes, "the devil is in the detail."
林衛俊 Music Blog於2011/02/22 23:25 回應
coach,
one more piece of info that you probably already know:
there is a branch of wing chun in Fatshan that doesn't even have sui nim tau! they practice 30 "points" or techniques on a wooden dummy.
what i am asking is this: is yip man's system a machine that needs ALL The parts to work ( from sui nim tau all the way to long pole) or forget it? or is it, true to chinese genius, a thing where what you learn is enough, if you master it?
one more piece of info that you probably already know:
there is a branch of wing chun in Fatshan that doesn't even have sui nim tau! they practice 30 "points" or techniques on a wooden dummy.
what i am asking is this: is yip man's system a machine that needs ALL The parts to work ( from sui nim tau all the way to long pole) or forget it? or is it, true to chinese genius, a thing where what you learn is enough, if you master it?
Coach H於2011/02/24 09:44回覆
Randy,
Hope life is treating you well in the South. Thanks for sharing your experience in music. Very interesting. I don't like to write long answer, so I will keep it brief. If that I didn't totally answer your question, then we can talk more next time you are in the class. Yes, I have seen many times that people only have learned SLT or Chum Kil dominated people who have learned Bil Jee or Wooden Dummy in free Chi Sao. It's not how much you know, it's how much you could apply what you know. Bruce Lee said "Knowing is not enough. You must apply." Speaking of which, Bruce himself only learned up to Chum Kil and one section of the Dummy, and yet he became arguably the most influential martial artist in the recent history. Even Sigung Wong Shun Leung started doing challenge fights right after he finished SLT. Having said that, Wing Chun is such a compact system, so everything has its place in the art. I like following quote and I think you will get my point when you read the quote. See you, until then take good care of yourself.
"I am not afraid of you know 1000 kicks that you practice once. But, I am afraid of you know just one kick but practice 1000 times."
Hope life is treating you well in the South. Thanks for sharing your experience in music. Very interesting. I don't like to write long answer, so I will keep it brief. If that I didn't totally answer your question, then we can talk more next time you are in the class. Yes, I have seen many times that people only have learned SLT or Chum Kil dominated people who have learned Bil Jee or Wooden Dummy in free Chi Sao. It's not how much you know, it's how much you could apply what you know. Bruce Lee said "Knowing is not enough. You must apply." Speaking of which, Bruce himself only learned up to Chum Kil and one section of the Dummy, and yet he became arguably the most influential martial artist in the recent history. Even Sigung Wong Shun Leung started doing challenge fights right after he finished SLT. Having said that, Wing Chun is such a compact system, so everything has its place in the art. I like following quote and I think you will get my point when you read the quote. See you, until then take good care of yourself.
"I am not afraid of you know 1000 kicks that you practice once. But, I am afraid of you know just one kick but practice 1000 times."
林衛俊 Music Blog於2011/02/22 23:08 回應
Coach,
this is your best article yet. as a music teacher, i'm telling my students this all the time- less is more. right now my music practice is just a few choice lines and some chordal etudes. it took me over 30 years to get this "simple" though.
as far as wing chun goes, yes the system has probably the shortest curriculum of any major martial arts system, the question comes up:
how much is too little, how much is enough, and how much is too much?
for instance, let's say "John" learns sui nim tao and sticky hands with one hand covers two. he never gets to learn chum kui and bui jee. meanwhile, " Bill" learns the whole system inlcuding weapons. Is it 100% that john cannot beat bill? is john forever damned to " i don't know chum kui yet" Hell? get my point?
in okinawan karate, ONE KATA is sufficient. one form contains everything a person needs to fight, if you know the "bunkai"/ application. why should wing chun be any different? is it 100% that siu num tao cannot beat chum kui? what if your siu nim tao is STELLAR? don't the BASICS form the most important part?
in shotokan, "BASSAI DAI" is not a way to counter " PINAN SHODAN". they are different things. if a person only learns pinan shodan WELL, really well with all the bunkai, atemi waza, blocks, irimi, etc it is ENOUGH FOR HIS/HER WHOLE LIFE! that kata becomes his/ her kata.
there is even a group in china or malyasia( i forget) that only has siu nim tau. are they lacking because they didn't learn chum kui?
just thinking on these points. again great article coach.
ran
Comments
Post a Comment