Hi Guys
Another interesting thread, thanks EAZ.
Firstly, let me say that my Pak Mei, or at least what I am taught, doesn’t contain the 5 animals theory as part of its teaching, internal or external. I know many do, and hesitate to speak for all Guangzhou Pak Mei, but this is the teaching of my Sifu to me.
Secondly, my own interest in 5 Animals and Elements is not diminished intellectually, and I have a basic understanding. I have other exposures too, beyond my Sifu, another life, another time. (back when I was a kid).
So, I am ready to accept any refutation, in that this is the product of my own understanding and perspective, and limited it may be.
From the study of comparative literature, we learn that any language, any literature, carries with it not only the face value of the words, but a sense of the time in which it was written. Plurality of meaning is common in philosophical writing, and that allows each “age” to bring to the interpretation the trappings of that time. The Bible is one such example.
The men that developed these theories are removed by many hundreds of years and lived in a world with little science, little education and much superstision. I think we can all agree on that?
The Animals and Elements were their way to verbalise their interpretations of physical phenomena and imparting wisdom beyond that. Also a way of developing their own “intellectual property” and intimidating opponents.
We are not of that lifetime, yet there are lessons to be had from their wisdom, the question is, how much is what they meant, and how much is our interpretation based on our own experience and understanding from this time.
If I am not mistaken, the I Ching contains many of the same concepts that martial artists use in their interpretations, which would indicate to me that these concepts in general are the currency of the time, not necessarily the currency of any particular martial art, rather, each Sifu, in his way, took this common philosophical framework and used it to explain their own particular “lessons” to their students.
Fundamentally, all the animals are more or less the same across all the arts, from my experience. Not the applications, but the profiles. 5 animals were expaned to 12 or thereabouts later, as the arts grew more specialised, physically speaking. Metaphysically speaking, there are other lessons from the animals, such as nature, attitude, strategy.
Thus, Tiger might be vicious clawing techniques, rolled shoulders, or likewise, an attitude towards an opponent that assumed inferiority and fear and gave the practitioner a seething hunter’s predisposition. A very simple example.
Now, all that rambling on my own personal viewpoints in order to address your third point, mon ami.
We do a pattern called Ng Ying, 5 Animals. We do a number of other patterns that also use other “movements/techniques” that go beyond the Tiger or Leopard “class.” Agreed, Pak Mei is known for the Tiger and Leopard, but the practice, the forms if you will, contain examples of all animals, or at least how we do them. Generically speaking.
Now, the fighting is another story. Suffice to say, fighting like a Tiger doesn’t necessarily mean using Tiger techniques? Nes Pas?
Do you find these comments consistant with your Animals and Elements teaching or inconsistant?
Mantis108
Pleased to meet you, Meltdawn gives you high praise.
What is the couplet in its complete form?
I ask, because what you say makes total sense to me from my own physical experience in Pak Mei. In a manner of speaking, a practitioner “crosses the bridge” as some point, or gets lost searching. This is a phenomena known to us, but I’ve never heard it put as succinctly or even related back to the heritage of our art.
Secondly, your Pak Mei experience, is that with Sifu Lee Pai or one of his students?
I think I will address the fine posts that you have separately if you don’t mind.