What's the purpose of MA!

[Laughing Cow]

Hi All.

What's the purpose of MA and why were they created in the first place?

Discuss away.

[joedoe]

A system to help give people a better chance for survival of life threatening situations.

[Surferdude]

Ditto...But where was the first real MA created???:confused: :D :p
Can anyone really say?

[joedoe]

Probably somewhere in Africa when Ug first went to hit Og and they battled. A few of their fellow cavemen watched and figured out a way to formalise it. :D

[Laughing Cow]

Joedoe:

Not a bad definiton, but I still think it lacks somewhat.

Surferdude:

I think the first MA came about when people started to standardise/optimise moves and attack patterns to allow multiple people fighting together.

MA's purpose, AFAIK, always was for battle-field use and less for individual (1on1) combat or SD.

[Surferdude]

Hmmm...:rolleyes:

[joedoe]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow
Joedoe:

Not a bad definiton, but I still think it lacks somewhat.

Surferdude:

I think the first MA came about when people started to standardise/optimise moves and attack patterns to allow multiple people fighting together.

MA's purpose, AFAIK, always was for battle-field use and less for individual (1on1) combat or SD.

I am not convinced that MA was primarily for battlefield use. They may have origins in battlefield technique (hence the martial aspect of it I guess) but I think they were refined and focused more for 1-on-1 and SD type applications.

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by joedoe


I am not convinced that MA was primarily for battlefield use. They may have origins in battlefield technique (hence the martial aspect of it I guess) but I think they were refined and focused more for 1-on-1 and SD type applications.

I think this holds true for a small subset of the MA, but most MA western and eastern, IMO, primarily focused on battlefield use.

Many of the MA weapons used don't have much usage outside of a battlefield or are simply too cumbersome to carry for personal protection.

Just my opinion naturally.

[joedoe]

Originally posted by Laughing Cow


I think this holds true for a small subset of the MA, but most MA western and eastern, IMO, primarily focused on battlefield use.

Many of the MA weapons used don't have much usage outside of a battlefield or are simply too cumbersome to carry for personal protection.

Just my opinion naturally.

Parts of this I agree with, and parts I don't. If we take fencing as an example (some might argue that it is not an MA :)) it really derived from duelling, not from the battlefield.

Another angle that can be taken is that the weapons may not have been exclusively for the battlefield - there are many stories of CMAs being used as a basis for running security activities like bodyguarding, policing, and guarding of caravans. The battlefield type weapons like swords, halberds, kwando etc. are applicable in this kind of scenario as well.

[Laughing Cow]

Joedoe.

No disagreement.

This goes back to my first post "standardised combat method".

Practicioners of my style were well known for providing security for caravans and being defenders for neighbouring villages.

Battle fields can be big and contain thousands of troops or small and contain tens of fighters.

Said that when I asked my Sifu why we perform move X or Y like this, his answer is that it was designed to work against someone wearing armour.

Cheers.

[joedoe]

Yeah, I guess it depends on how you define a battlefield. I guess in my mind a battlefield implies armies etc. :)

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by joedoe
Yeah, I guess it depends on how you define a battlefield. I guess in my mind a battlefield implies armies etc. :)

Interestingly enough:

"The art of War"
&
"A book of five rings"

apply to invidual combat and full army combat.

Cheers.

[Becca]

Do any of your styles have forms designed to teahc self-defence against 2 or more attakers? These could be adapted to a battlefeild, as well, but usually are designed for someone being jumped in some back alley by multiple attackers.

[Laughing Cow]

Becca.

We don't have such forms perse, but we are taught how to apply what we learn for multiple attacker scenarios.

AFAIK, most ancient warfare was mostly 1on1 with a few opportunity attacks while you were fighting, once you dispatched your opponent you fought the next one or tried to get an opportunity attack on someone.

[Becca]

LC- interesting. Many of our form do have multiple attackers. We have to adapt them for one-on-one. Our self-defences are the only ones I know so far that only deal with one attacker.

[Laughing Cow]

Becca.

Our style is pretty much principle based, we learn head usage and a few other things in the forms that help with multiple attackers.

Each of our movements/postures contains multiple attacks and defensive moves.
Some of those are even considered by some a miniature MA style within itself.

Said that we only have 2 primary unarmed forms. Of weapon forms we got quiet a bit.

[Becca]

What style do you study?

[Laughing Cow]

Originally posted by Becca
What style do you study?

Chen TJQ, being taught what I am told is the traditional method.
;)

[quiet man]

Originally posted by joedoe
Probably somewhere in Africa when Ug first went to hit Og and they battled. A few of their fellow cavemen watched and figured out a way to formalise it. :D

LOL!

And after that, Ug formed the first martial arts organization in history by selling Og dead skunk hide as a black belt.



P.S. Visit the MTI!

[TigerJaw]

What about all this business with Bodhiharma (Sp?), the monk from India who walked to China and taught moving meditation to the Shaolin Monks. I thought that was generally thought to be the origin of the arts as we know them.

Of course, there are arts from other parts of the world with entirely seperate histories.

[Laughing Cow]

TigerJaw.

The verdict is still out on that story.
:D
IMO, there are too many loopholes that were filled badly and I am sure that the real story is quiet different from what is told now.

Even though he is said to have been skilled in indian Ma before he travelled to China.

The thread is about MA in general and not just about CMA or shaolin derived arts.

As figthing arts have existed in all societies and were used heavily, unfortunately we lost a lot of the arts.

Cheers.

[joedoe]

Originally posted by TigerJaw
What about all this business with Bodhiharma (Sp?), the monk from India who walked to China and taught moving meditation to the Shaolin Monks. I thought that was generally thought to be the origin of the arts as we know them.

Of course, there are arts from other parts of the world with entirely seperate histories.

From what I understand this is a bit of a myth. He may have taught them yoga-type exercises, but some historians think the monks were already fairly skilled MAs.

Who knows?

[TigerJaw]

I was under the impression that the story was that he he taught them yoga-type moving meditations that developed into Chi-gung and Ne-gung and all that stuff. They developed those into MA later. Not that Bodhiharma taught them MA.

Like you say. MA is as old as civilisation itself so is impossible to trace to it's origins, of which it will doubless have several.