Is Bak Mei a 5 animal style or is the emphasis on Leopard-Tiger?

[Yum Cha]

Anyway(this is my take), the whole legend that Bak Mei was evil started it all. From I can gather it was created by the Hung Gar people that were trying to kill Bak Mei. From there the legend grew and every lineage has their own take on it.

Some say that he simply decided not to fight and therefore he was a traitor. Others say that he was the "Judas" of the group. Others state that he was a spy for the rebels, caught, and the lives of his student's threatened and he therefore left the resistance.

Either way, he was labeled a traitor to Shaolin and people tried to kill him.

At the time, Wudang and Shaolin were considered rivals. I suppose it was due to the fact that their opinions on religion differed. I suppose that rivalry helped Bak Mei change from a Monk who helped the Shaolin escape the fire to a Taoist who is already an "enemy" of Shaolin. That coupled with the fact that Hung Gar was considered Shaolin by the majority made the change one that made sense.

The Shaws took the legend and ran with it, creating some great films.

This enhanced the BM/Taoist thing.

Unfortunately, all that 5 ancestors fairy tale stuff really has little to do with the practical application of the art.

Then Ub Un's book came out and flat out called BM a taoist. However, he also stated that CLC was wearing Taoist robes yet they are clearly Shaolin.

Now, Man of the Tao doesn't exactly mean taoist priest. It can but not always. It can also mean a man that follows a Taoist way of life. It can also mean a renaissance man.

SO, while I understand while one might think that BM was taoist, I don't think that he was. '

The shaolin temple had been 100 years burned down, How could CLC be wearing Shaolin robes? He trained at the Gwong Hau Gee, and the robes bit is I think a bit literal. Not conclusive evidence in my opinion. Clothing is simply worn or not worn, could have been a PR exercise to make himself look more pious. It could even be that CLC was buddhist, but the skills he learned came from a daoist source. Nevertheless, I take your point, and it is contentious at face value.

Once again, I will suggest that you guys check out Dr. Wong's site. He can explain it better than I. Also, I don't think that the Vietnamese were the one's who first added all the Buddhist aspects of the style. Especially considering the since "all BM comes from CLC", CLC's teacher CHut Fat Wan is always seen (in pictures) wearing the Buddhist robes. As is CLC himself. Chut fat wan is also usually called a Shaolin Monk.

Again, the robes. Contentious and unresolved in the face of the following Daoist influences:

The breathing, keeping the breath, cycling the breath. This is clearly a taoist practice.

The attitude - buddhists value all life. Pak Mei does not have that "we're all one happy family" attitude. Pak Mei is violent and lethal as the cosmos, again, Taoist principles.

Chuk Fat Wan was only ONE of CLC's teachers. His last teacher. He taught CLC the energy, breathing and core skills that CLC laid upon his Hakka Family style arts to create Pak Mei. Visually, Pak Mei is so significantly different to the other Shaolin styles, I don't feel it supports the proposition it is a Shaolin style, regardless of the fairytale 5 Ancestors BS.

In all fairness, I do take your point concerning the robes as valid and in conflict with my understanding, but easily resolved. Futher, I myself have no more than conjecture and research to support my opinion, and I'm always looking for more info to further refine my understanding.

In the close to 100 years that the art has been around, it has evolved, been mashed with other stuff, and been interpreted by many people. I think as an intellectual argument this is interesting, but it has no impact on the practice of the art. Where it becomes pointed for me is when people abandon the daoist breathing, and than they are losing something of the art.

I mentioned the vietnamese lineage particularly, because they have such strong buddhist faith, and perhaps I could say they have amplified the buddhist perspective on the art from my perspective.

ps--Xia, all animals are used.

Yes, you can find the animals if you choose to use that metaphore to work under. However, compared to say Hung Kune, they are not as much as a cornerstone of the art and its mythology, as one would expect from a Shaolin style.

In these examinations of the arts, I think it is often a matter of degrees as opposed to a cut and dried right and wrong. Too many hands, to many interpretations, too many years lie between us and the originators to find any real truth at this point.

[ittokaos]

Yes, you can find the animals if you choose to use that metaphore to work under. However, compared to say Hung Kune, they are not as much as a cornerstone of the art and its mythology, as one would expect from a Shaolin style.

Animals are not exclusive to Shaolin styles only. Tai Chi Quan is said to have been influenced by the Crane and the Snake. Bagauzhang is said to have been influenced by the movements of the Dragon. Both are considered Taoist styles.

I am not contesting the fact that BM was taoist, I simply stating that with the facts that I provided, I dont believe that he was.

Peace

[The Xia]

If you had to describe each animal in Bak Mei, how would you do that? Do the animals also relate to techniques as well?

[ittokaos]

Well, I am not too sure if I understand the question(maybe I am slow) but I will answer as best as I can(I dont even know if the answer was for me).

First, let me say that I am not a Sifu nor have I been doing BM for years. Also, I can't really speak for those who practice differently from the way I practice.

Anyway, I guess if I would have to describe the aspects(of each animal) used by BM it would be like this: The body and fluidity of the Dragon, the power and spirit of the Tiger, the speed and footwork of the Leopard, the cunning, coiling, and pressure point strikes of the Snake, and the quick whippiing strikes and grace of the Crane.

Does that answer the question? Did I missunderstand?

I hope this helps,

WF

[Yum Cha]

Yea, animals as a metaphore are confusing.

Some construct 5 animals, and assign each a character, as opposed to specific technique, as Itto did.

Some have dozens of animals, including dogs, ducks, gorillas, etc, and the individual moves are named for animal moves. i.e. duck kick, bear strike, snake finger attack, etc.

I think there is something in this difference, but I haven't got a clue what!

Itto, one thing I learned a long time ago, it is impossible to determine the accuracy of chinese mythology, stories and history. Its all just for the fun of the discussion, and the occasional tidbit of good logical information that comes up as a reward, or your own understanding of what you know and how to make it work.