Amongst the Wing Chun concepts is one expressed in the kuen kuit: “Min lum dik jun mo hong fong”. This can be translated to mean that “when facing an attacker there is no fear”. There are sound practical reasons why this ought to be and why, in fact, once one is fully and properly trained in our Wing Chun, that it is the case. There is also another twin kuen kuit, which follows from : “Min lum dik jun mo hong fong”, which says: “Pa da jung bay da”, this translates as: “he who fears being hit will be hit”. These two kuen kuit ought be read and understood together.
First, as to why a lack of fear when facing an attacker ought be very important. That there is a lack of fear is not to say that we ought be blase or opinionated about an attacker. It is to say, however, that we ought not be frozen by fear. We need to be conscious of attacks being launched into gates. We need to be conscious of maintaining our centreline, centre of gravity, alignment of our structures and our relaxation. We need to be conscious of line and targets. We need to be conscious of allowing our trained responsivity in keeping with the concepts of Wing Chun and our twelve key words to simply “come out of us”. All of this we ought to have trained to a level of automaticity beyond thought. Hence we ought have no more fear of our art not working for us than we need to fear not having the capacity to pull our hand instantly off a hot burning surface. It will simply happen.
We cannot afford to be frozen either psychologically or physically under the stress of realworld combat. It is not sparring. It is not a gwoon drill. It has an entirely different reality, set of perceptions and emotions, and consequences attached to it. It feels vastly different. It’s, after all, real! If we are frozen, we stand a very good chance of being struck with all the force our attacker can muster; being beaten; being injured; being disabled; or, perhaps in some instances, killed. Hence, if fear freezes a person under realworld attack conditions, the consequences can be dire. Thus, a lack of fear - as fear impedes us successfully defending ourselves - is vital!
Fearing, which I equate with freezing, is to become attached to our mind’s projections of what might happen, what may have just happened (if we are still conscious and functional if we’ve been struck or struck at), and our conjectures as to the attacker’s intent and abilities. All of these are attachments which will defeat you. If we fear being bit we will tighten up and greatly increase the likelihood that we actually will be hit. We may legitimately be alert, aware and apprehensive - the latter to a point short of it debilitating our responsivity. But we ought not be afraid. If the enemy has made you fear him he is well along the path to beating you.
A decisive calmness and confidence must pervade our consciousness in combat. We must be cool and commanding. I am playing with initial letters here to make my point and to impress it in your memory. I am also, simply put, in accord with the thinking of the founders who passed down this kuen kuit. We have trained our drills, we have understood and incorporated the principles and intuitively are able to always apply the principles of Wing Chun and to apply the concepts contextually as called for. We respond according to circumstances applying the art we have invested so much into. Our return on our investment ought then be viewed confidently! Why would we invest so much in our training only to doubt it, only to fear when it is tested? Why invest our money, time, effort, and suffering if the return is not forthcoming? The time for doubt, the time for testing is not when we are attacked by a criminal outside the gwoon!
I have heard, and understand, a popular modern notion that we ought be afraid but transform our fear into aggression. As I say, I can understand this. Perhaps we would agree if we could sit down and exchange our thinking, I and those who say this, and are not merely regurgitating and repeating it but really understand it. Maybe the difference, if there is any, is one of linguistic expression. The general arousal syndrome teaches us that we don’t become aroused differently under threat but we can label our feelings differently - as, for example here, as “fear” or “aggression”. If those who preach “turn fear into aggression” are referring to altering this labelling process then maybe there is a point to their thinking. But turning fear to aggression simply by willing it to occur is not likely to succeed in my view. Flying into a bind rage to intimidate our attacker and cover our fear is not, as I see it, the optimal situation.
Maybe, my disagreement does go deeper to the underlying conceptual level. On reflection, I think perhaps I do disagree - at least in essence. Fear can freeze even the transformation process. It can freeze our cognitive and emotional efforts to reframe our perceived experience of impending or actual attack. I think that like saying “turn fat into muscle” - which is impossible, the “turn fear into aggression “ really means to overcome the fear and to do this by using it somehow to express aggression. My understanding is we don’t actually turn fear into aggression per se, we replace it with aggression. The speed with which this is accomplished and the means by which it is done and the arena in which it occurs may be where those who say this and I disagree - if in fact, we do.
Second, as to why a lack of fear when facing an attacker is the case. Far better, in my view than training or talking about “turning fear into aggression” by simply being more aggressive for those few who more or less naturally can do so, is to train the experience of courage coming from confidence, and confidence coming from competence. I believe this is optimally undertaken well before we face any realworld self defence situation. Hence, the transformation, to my way of thinking, begins far ahead of the situation in which a lever must be pushed from fear to aggression in one moment under the pressures of a realworld threat. This entails a specific method of training both mind and body and unifying them under conditions of realworld combat. Essentially it is training in ensuring fear does not arise at all. I won’t detail this here except to say that the saying that we ought to train exactly as we will fight to defend ourselves in realworld combat is the key if it is taken fairly literally and our competence calibrated against realworld attacks.
We must give prominent attention to “Min lum dik jun mo hong fong pa da jung bay da” in training our competence and thus in training our confidence in order to develop courage in realworld combat.