The Biu Jee Enigma

[Nobody Important]

On another thread Geezer mentioned that his line claims that the Biu Jee form was constructed from the knives. I know he didn't want to discuss this in depth and I respect that, but found it to be an interesting topic. In my line we believe that the knives came from Biu Jee. To-may-to, To-mah-to really and in the grand scheme of things irrelevant.

In my line of YCWWC we also believe White Crane to be the root of our system, citing various reasons I'd rather not delve into right now. In YCWWC we correlate SLT with Sam Chien (3 Battles) & CK with Na Jong Fat (Controlling Center Method). These are White Crane forms, in Karate known as Sanchin & Naifuanchin. The odd man out in this equation is Biu Jee, no lineage of White Crane (Fujian or Okinawan) has anything that could even remotely resemble Biu Jee choreography wise.

From my perspective this brings the question of where Biu Jee could have come from if Wing Chun really does have a relationship with White Crane. Was it based upon the knives? Or if the knives come from Biu Jee, where did Biu Jee come from?

Most branches of Wing Chun suggest that Biu Jee is outside "normal" parameters of Wing Chun methodology, so I thought it would be interesting what others think about how it came into being.

 

[ShortBridge]

There is a crane form that I saw once that was shockingly consistent with Biu Jee. It was not from the branch(s) of crane that I have studied, but I do have access to it. I'm sorry I don't have the name or a video.

 

[Nobody Important]

There is a crane form that I saw once that was shockingly consistent with Biu Jee. It was not from the branch(s) of crane that I have studied, but I do have access to it. I'm sorry I don't have the name or a video.

If you run across the name, video or any other information about it I would be very interested.

 

[Vajramusti]

On another thread Geezer mentioned that his line claims that the Biu Jee form was constructed from the knives. I know he didn't want to discuss this in depth and I respect that, but found it to be an interesting topic. In my line we believe that the knives came from Biu Jee. To-may-to, To-mah-to really and in the grand scheme of things irrelevant.

In my line of YCWWC we also believe White Crane to be the root of our system, citing various reasons I'd rather not delve into right now. In YCWWC we correlate SLT with Sam Chien (3 Battles) & CK with Na Jong Fat (Controlling Center Method). These are White Crane forms, in Karate known as Sanchin & Naifuanchin. The odd man out in this equation is Biu Jee, no lineage of White Crane (Fujian or Okinawan) has anything that could even remotely resemble Biu Jee choreography wise.

From my perspective this brings the question of where Biu Jee could have come from if Wing Chun really does have a relationship with White Crane. Was it based upon the knives? Or if the knives come from Biu Jee, where did Biu Jee come from?

Most branches of Wing Chun suggest that Biu Jee is outside "normal" parameters of Wing Chun methodology, so I thought it would be interesting what others think about how it came into being.

 

[Vajramusti]

---------------------------------------------------
Wing chun has a well developed integrity of its own. Whatever the original ingredients they have been transformed. San chin and slt are quite different. The seeds of chum kiu and biu jee are in slt as well.
IP man taught very few people the biu jee. Even the great WSL's
biu jee has sloppy sections. Sorry for being contrary.

 

[ShortBridge]

I am certain that I won't have a video to share, but I'll see if I can come up with a name and history.

I know 2 versions of San Chin and have seen a few more. I've never associated it in any way with Si Lim Tao and I can't really get my brain around that.

 

[Nobody Important]

---------------------------------------------------
Wing chun has a well developed integrity of its own. Whatever the original ingredients they have been transformed. San chin and slt are quite different. The seeds of chum kiu and biu jee are in slt as well.
IP man taught very few people the biu jee. Even the great WSL's
biu jee has sloppy sections. Sorry for being contrary.

Oh I agree, any connection to modern fujian White Crane has long since been transformed. Even White Crane from 150 years ago is nothing like its successor today. I also agree that Wing Chun as a system is cohesive with intact integrity. From my YCWWC perspective only, the "origins" of Biu Jee are not as established as SLT & CK. I agree with your assessment of Biu Jee being integrated into the other sets, for me it doesn't explain how Biu Jee & it's unique methodology came into being. It really isn't all that important, just thought it would be something interesting to discuss.

 

[Nobody Important]

I am certain that I won't have a video to share, but I'll see if I can come up with a name and history.

I know 2 versions of San Chin and have seen a few more. I've never associated it in any way with Si Lim Tao and I can't really get my brain around that.

Thank you that would be great.

Not to derail my own thread, but there is more than a few commonalities between SLT & Sam Chin, in YCWWC anyways, I wouldn't extend that relationship to all Wing Chun.

Choson Miyagi's version of Tensho is based upon the White Crane form Ba Shou Sanzhan (8 Hands Sam Chin). This is essentially the 3rd section of YCWWC SLT known as Flower Fist. Stylistically they are performed differently and with different energy but the choreography is nearly identical. This lends credence to the plausibility of a common source. 3 arts with three different interpretations of the same thing.

 

[Juany118]

Okay, here is the ideas of a person who had to fight more than a bit due to his career before he serious started studying WC. I am more focused on the reason for Bil Jee and not the "source here" fyi.

I see it and what do I see? I am doing a form designed for the "Oh CRAP!!!!" moment. If I am thrusting with fingers for the eyes etc it is because "oh crap I need space". If I am throwing elbows like that, and elbows are effective btw, it is because "oh crap I got TOO close and need space to escape". If we are forced to define what the forms are for, I see SLT as the foundation/alphabet. CK as "well now you are fighting". BJ as "okay something went side ways, time to make and opening so you can get back in control." So, imo it is possible BJ is simply a "child" of all the forms in WC/VT. It need not have an origin outside at this point. It is taking what is already WC/VT and simply acknowledging that inevitably in some fight, somewhere, things will go sideways.

 

[ShortBridge]

I'm not sure I totally see things as you, Juany (though I'm not saying you're wrong), but I do see that the 4 forms, including the Mook Jong build on and compliment each other very nicely and logically. None of them seem out of place to me and I think it's a very well conceived method of teaching and advancing through a system.

 

[Juany118]

I'm not sure I totally see things as you, Juany (though I'm not saying you're wrong), but I do see that the 4 forms, including the Mook Jong build on and compliment each other very nicely and logically. None of them seem out of place to me and I think it's a very well conceived method of teaching and advancing through a system.

Oh I dont think anything is out of place either and this might just be my perception based on anecdotal experience of when I actually use those techniques most often. Its just the "feel" I get based on that experience.

 

[DanT]

On another thread Geezer mentioned that his line claims that the Biu Jee form was constructed from the knives. I know he didn't want to discuss this in depth and I respect that, but found it to be an interesting topic. In my line we believe that the knives came from Biu Jee. To-may-to, To-mah-to really and in the grand scheme of things irrelevant.

In my line of YCWWC we also believe White Crane to be the root of our system, citing various reasons I'd rather not delve into right now. In YCWWC we correlate SLT with Sam Chien (3 Battles) & CK with Na Jong Fat (Controlling Center Method). These are White Crane forms, in Karate known as Sanchin & Naifuanchin. The odd man out in this equation is Biu Jee, no lineage of White Crane (Fujian or Okinawan) has anything that could even remotely resemble Biu Jee choreography wise.

From my perspective this brings the question of where Biu Jee could have come from if Wing Chun really does have a relationship with White Crane. Was it based upon the knives? Or if the knives come from Biu Jee, where did Biu Jee come from?

Most branches of Wing Chun suggest that Biu Jee is outside "normal" parameters of Wing Chun methodology, so I thought it would be interesting what others think about how it came into being.

-Biu Jee is nothing special, just another form, it's not secret, it's not special, it's not any more important, and being good at it doesn't mean sh*t.

-Biu Jee is Biu Jee, I've seen white crane forms being preformed SIMILARLY, but that doesn't mean sh*t either because white crane and wing chun are similar anyways.

-the knives did not come from the Biu Jee form, the knife form was made up by yip man, and didn't exist before, but he may have used Biu Jee to come up with the choreographics

-the knife form is maybe 50 years old

-Biu Jee is maybe 200 years old

- wing chun is wing chun, it's developed into its own fighting method, and it's history with white crane, while interesting, isn't all that important in my opinion. You don't hear white crane people talking about how some monk came up with form x on mountain x and how technique x came from technique y. They just do their thing and keep the tradition that had DEVELOPED alive.

 

[ShortBridge]

My "out of place" comment was really directed back to the OP. I get your points, Juany, but I've never full embraced the "emergency techniques/recovery theory" of biu jee. It is a common one and it may be true, but as Vaj suggested, it feels like a natural extension of the previous forms more so than something contradictory to me.

I do happen to buy into the notion that White Crane is ancestral to Wing Chun, but I've never thought of Si Lim Tao being related to San Chin. I'd need some time to think about that one.

The one Wing Chun form that I do feel like I've seen a Crane equivalent to was Biu Jee, but it's not from the family of Crane that I study.

 

[Nobody Important]

-Biu Jee is nothing special, just another form, it's not secret, it's not special, it's not any more important, and being good at it doesn't mean sh*t.

-Biu Jee is Biu Jee, I've seen white crane forms being preformed SIMILARLY, but that doesn't mean sh*t either because white crane and wing chun are similar anyways.

-the knives did not come from the Biu Jee form, the knife form was made up by yip man, and didn't exist before, but he may have used Biu Jee to come up with the choreographics

-the knife form is maybe 50 years old

-Biu Jee is maybe 200 years old

- wing chun is wing chun, it's developed into its own fighting method, and it's history with white crane, while interesting, isn't all that important in my opinion. You don't hear white crane people talking about how some monk came up with form x on mountain x and how technique x came from technique y. They just do their thing and keep the tradition that had DEVELOPED alive.

I respect your stance and take no issue with it, and as a FYI, I'm not looking for historical significance or anything. I just thought it would be an interesting topic to discuss to see how other branches of Wing Chun felt about it. Thank you for contributing.

 

[geezer]

Just for clarification, the individual that told me that Biu Tze was sort of "reverse engineered" from Bart Cham Dao ideas was speaking broadly about concept, not about the YM BCD form, and not literally about the knives. Anybody who has any experience with a blade art knows that knives and bare hands are two different realities!

BTW I personally have seen nothing to suggest that the Biu Tze set in anything like it's current forms (as there are many) is anything like 200 years old. In truth, in spite of our origin story, there isn't much to suggest that WC/VT/WT --as a distinct art-- is quite that old. The best evidence I've seen places it's emergence in the mid 19th C.

 

[DanT]

Just for clarification, the individual that told me that Biu Tze was sort of "reverse engineered" from Bart Cham Dao ideas was speaking broadly about concept, not about the YM BCD form, and not literally about the knives. Anybody who has any experience with a blade art knows that knives and bare hands are two different realities!

BTW I personally have seen nothing to suggest that the Biu Tze set in anything like it's current forms (as there are many) is anything like 200 years old. In truth, in spite of our origin story, there isn't much to suggest that WC/VT/WT --as a distinct art-- is quite that old. The best evidence I've seen places it's emergence in the mid 19th C.

I agree, 1850's at the earliest, my 200 year old thing was more a rounding off. For all intents and purposes, in my mind Leung Jan being the "founder" of the wing chun we know seems reasonable, as everything before him just seems a bit too mystical. Wing Chun as practiced commonly today can find Leung Jan as the oldest common ancestor and in my mind he should be considered the starting point for wing chun.

Leung Jan - Chan Wah Shun - Yip Man

 

[Juany118]

My "out of place" comment was really directed back to the OP. I get your points, Juany, but I've never full embraced the "emergency techniques/recovery theory" of biu jee. It is a common one and it may be true, but as Vaj suggested, it feels like a natural extension of the previous forms more so than something contradictory to me.

I do happen to buy into the notion that White Crane is ancestral to Wing Chun, but I've never thought of Si Lim Tao being related to San Chin. I'd need some time to think about that one.

The one Wing Chun form that I do feel like I've seen a Crane equivalent to was Biu Jee, but it's not from the family of Crane that I study.

But I see it as a natural extension as well, again based on my personal experience. Sometime, somewhere, in a real fight things go wrong. The go "sideways" or "pear shaped" what ever term you chose. For a fighting method to properly prepare a warrior/guardian it needs to address this reality and BJ seems to do just that. So I don't see it as contradictory at all, simply another necessary step in a logical progression.

 

[Nobody Important]

I agree, 1850's at the earliest, my 200 year old thing was more a rounding off. For all intents and purposes, in my mind Leung Jan being the "founder" of the wing chun we know seems reasonable, as everything before him just seems a bit too mystical. Wing Chun as practiced commonly today can find Leung Jan as the oldest common ancestor and in my mind he should be considered the starting point for wing chun.

Leung Jan - Chan Wah Shun - Yip Man

In all fairness, even though Leung Jan is the oldest documented ancestor. Systems stemming from Fung Siu Ching & Fok Bo Chun, who were contemporaries of Leung Jan are just as legitimate. Yuen family Wing Chun has no relation to Leung Jan but are connected through one of his teachers, Wong Wah Bo. The material passed on is similar so logic dictates that the existence of Wong Wah Bo was very plausible. Some branches have no connection to WWB, LLT or LJ at all, I wouldn't be so quick to write them off simply because documentation doesn't exist outside their family. Ethnocentrism leads to the death of true understanding. Wing Chun existed long before Yip Man came to learn it. Because of his popularity his line has been the most researched, but just because this is where the majority of historical research is focused doesn't mean other, unaligned, branches are illegitimate.

Is that a fair assessment?

 

[LFJ]

Most actions in our BJ are preparatory knife actions where the hands may represent the blades in such a way that it would not make sense to do the form without knife thinking already present, meaning it's more likely based on the knives than not.

BJ obviously differs from SNT and CK because it borrows strategy from the knives that conflict with the core VT boxing method taught in SNT+CK, but still completes the system with necessary ingredients. If the method fails, even slightly, not necessarily to a state of "emergency", you need means of recovering to the core idea. BJ gives that.

 

[LFJ]

Wing chun has a well developed integrity of its own. Whatever the original ingredients they have been transformed.

Demonstrably false by the identical pole method found in a pre- and non-VT style. It has not been transformed and our boxing method is based on it.

IP man taught very few people the biu jee. Even the great WSL's
biu jee has sloppy sections.

What do you mean by sloppy, and which sections?