Martial Morals

[the Preacher]

Does Martial Arts teach any morality?:confused:
or Not?






Eph. 6 (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV2&byte=5197699)

Put on the whole armour of God,
that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood,
but against principalities, against powers,
against the rulers of the darkness of this world,
against spiritual wickedness in high places.

Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God,
that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day,
and having done all, to stand.

Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth,
and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
Above all, taking the shield of faith,
wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
And take the helmet of salvation,
and the sword of the Spirit,
which is the word of God:

[Seppukku]

Yes, I used to play with myself, like a lot. My mother told me that idle hands were the devil's playground. And I guess my ***** is the monkey bars. I used to play with my monkey bar all the time, and it started to chafe.

But when I started to do taekwandos and kung fus, I didn't play with myself as much. My priest tells me this is a good thing.

[SPJ]

I would not say morality per se.

one's moral standard was determined by cultural, social, family, religion and one's own perception of the world and relative to others.

MA practice or any physical activity, however, not only build your body physically but also build your mind and character.

such as diligence, endurance, perservance, --

however, each style or MA school may have certain codes of conduct or ethics.

karate has wu de hui.

so do your school have codes, too?

chin woo men was to instill diligence and tolerance/bearance into students

to be diligent or not

to bear or not to bear, that is the question.

--

[Shaolinlueb]

well if you consider who some of our great martial artists were in history. you decide. they were murderer's for a large part, who used thier kung fu to kill, incapacitate or persuade. not until the republican government in 1911 did they start teaching it for health and morals. most of the stuff in movies is confucian stuff that is a movie, not real.

you go figure.

[Black Jack II]

not until the republican government in 1911 did they start teaching it for health and morals.

LMAO...that makes actually no sense whatsoever.

Talk about odd logic.:rolleyes:

[B-Rad]

In other words, that's when it started being pushed by the government in their martial arts programs and became a more formal aspect of TCMA. Before that, everything was more clannish and gang like (more about family loyalty rather than having any universal code of wu de). I couldn't say if it's true or not, but I think that's what he's referring to.

[Scott R. Brown]

Hmmmm........let me see if I understand this correctly.

The Shaolin Temple monks are/were Buddhists, they taught the martial arts and trained in the martial arts, but taught no morals or ethics?

Taoist monks trained and taught the martial arts, but had no morals or ethics either?

Morals and ethics are not inherent to any activity. There is no inherent morality or ethics to walking, swimming, fighting or playing basketball. Morals and ethics are taught and followed by those who believe they are essential to living a correct/righteous and good/beneficial life. Just because they were not taught along side many or most martial arts does not mean they were not taught by some.

Even the Samurai were generally expected to follow moral and ethical codes regardless of whether some or many actually followed the codes.

[sholo86]

According to my good buddy Wikipedia - MORALITY (from the Latin moralitas "manner, character, proper behavior") has three principal meanings.
In its first descriptive usage, morality means a code of conduct held to be authoritative in matters of right and wrong, whether by society, philosophy, religion, or individual conscience.
In its second, normative and universal, sense, morality refers to an ideal code of conduct, one which would be espoused in preference to alternatives by all rational people, under specified conditions.
In its third usage 'morality' is synonymous with ethics, the systematic philosophical study of the moral domain.

I normally view morality in it's first descriptive usage. Through our training, we try to live by the martial artists codes of conduct taught or explained to us by our teachers. How many times do we hear people say " If it weren't for martial arts, I would have been..." or "Martials arts helped me...."

So, IMO martial arts do teach morality and help guide those individuals that lack it . It also contributes to the moral growth to those that think they already have good moral backgrounds.

[Mr Punch]

Hmmmm........let me see if I understand this correctly.

The Shaolin Temple monks are/were Buddhists, they taught the martial arts and trained in the martial arts, but taught no morals or ethics?

Taoist monks trained and taught the martial arts, but had no morals or ethics either?1) A lot of MA didn't come from Shaolin or the Taoists.

2) A helluva lot (emphasis on 'hell'! :D ) of martial arts in the Buddhist and Taoist sects came from gangsters, bandits and murderers. Think about it: in the West we had the same religious laws: asylum. Felons and lowlifes seeking asylum from the authorities were granted clemency by the monasteries, and in return they protected the monasteries and helped keep their martial traditions alive with new ones.

3) Again related to the above. Think of the Crusades: a lot of moral instruction was not based on improving people but damage limitation. That's why there are so many ecclesiastical treatises to fighting for the power of god: if you get a group of largely celibate, solely male, 50% or so criminal people in a confined space and teach them fighting you're gonna need to use it. In China it was mainly defending themselves, in the West we could attack the Moslems!

These are just a couple of thoughts, not especially backed by any evidence. Feel free to point out flaws in the arguments.


Even the Samurai were generally expected to follow moral and ethical codes regardless of whether some or many actually followed the codes.That's a very interesting point. Most of the samurai codes were Confucian, and yes of course were moral codes, but more to the point they were societal codes, enforced by and generated by the mores of the society around them. The written codes that we now know as samurai ethics like bushido and the Hagakure, were all written in peacetime, again as constraints on a bored, powerful, dangerous and often borderline or out-and-out criminal class of unemployed warriors.

So I think the moral codes in all of these societies weren't based on: 'Do this because it makes you good,' just on, 'Don't do this or youll go to hell'. More of a plea for restraint than a moral instruction. Look what's happened to many of the soldiers in Iraq who're highly trained to kill, without the moral component: you have dehumanization on such a scale as Stephen Green who gang-raped and murdered a 14 year old girl and killed her family because according to his own testimony, there was no thrill in just killing people any more.

The moral instructions of the warrior-monk castes in medieval times and in the orient did as much as they could to build in those restraints, but of course sometimes the killer urges were subjugated by saying, ah well, it's OK to kill them cos they're Moslems... oh bugger, perhaps this is the same now, and perhaps this post is taking a disturbingly political angle...! :eek: :D

To the OP: don't be ridiculous, of course not. :p And welcome to the forum! Of course, in this modern world where everyone's supposed to be personal responsible for their actions nobody teaches morals anymore. Can anyone see the breakdown in logic here?! You're supposed to know what right and wrong is, so nobody teaches you, so of course you don't know...! :confused: ... which is why you get a huge breakdown in the church and society, and even the church's moral education has ceased to preach social responsibility outside a very small circle, and now preaches only personal salvation and personal responsibility. I blame the parents.

[RD'S Alias - 1A]

No they don't...but many try to teach them side by side....

[sanjuro_ronin]

Re the Samurai:
The higher ups knew that having a bunch of trained killers around with little or nothing to do but get into trouble was not a good thing, so they were smart enought o TRY and instill "morals, ethics and responsiblity" on them, or course they succed and failed all at the same time.
And in the case of the Samurai, one will notice that the morals and such were guided by duty to one's liege.

[Mr Punch]

Re the Samurai:
The higher ups knew that having a bunch of trained killers around with little or nothing to do but get into trouble was not a good thing, so they were smart enought o TRY and instill "morals, ethics and responsiblity" on them, or course they succed and failed all at the same time.
And in the case of the Samurai, one will notice that the morals and such were guided by duty to one's liege.Didn't I say that? :confused:

Ma beetch! :p

[sanjuro_ronin]

Didn't I say that? :confused:

Ma beetch! :p

Your post was more yin, my had more yang, as such, they balance each other out and make the Tao much more harmonious.

[Mr Punch]

Your post was more yin, my had more yang, as such, they balance each other out and make the Tao much more harmonious.I see. Obviously as does the fact that yo ma beetch...! :D

[mantis108]

1) A lot of MA didn't come from Shaolin or the Taoists.

MA like many other knowledge and technology in ancient China would have been state owned. Clans and families are the keepers of these affairs. Most if not all traditional Kung Fu would have something to do with the military and protection of the imperial properties (practically the whole China) and personales. But as the economies changes from agricultural base to a more diversed economy including commercial trade. Other trades such as militia men, teachers, guards, escorts, bandits and entertainers (lowest of the scale). Shaolin monk troops are somewhat militia-esque. They are granted special privilege by the Emperors. Daoist militia, although not a rule, mostly degenerate into cult militia and often become banned or destroyed. So yes, most of the MA didn't come from Shaolin or Wudang.


2) A helluva lot (emphasis on 'hell'! :D ) of martial arts in the Buddhist and Taoist sects came from gangsters, bandits and murderers. Think about it: in the West we had the same religious laws: asylum. Felons and lowlifes seeking asylum from the authorities were granted clemency by the monasteries, and in return they protected the monasteries and helped keep their martial traditions alive with new ones.

Well, in some way those gangaster, bandits and murderers would still need of "salvation" and we need to understand that some of them were pushed to join the gangs. This is why novels such as "water margin" is popular becames it speaks of the corruption of the government and turns good and ordinary people to rise up against it. Make no mistake, most people know what's right and what's wrong most of the time (I bet even Mr Bush knows he ****s up most of the time) and recgonize there is a higher calling. But not every one could or would make the right choice and/or do the right thing. So...

There is a difference between actually having Buddhist and Daoist philosophies inherit in a Kung Fu system and a system that became "spiritual" because the progenitor of the system became a worshiper or follower of a spiritual discipline. In other words, spiritual by affiliations is quite common. One example is that people somehow come across Yi Jin Jing (and there are plenty 0f versions), which is "believed" to be of Shaolin origin; hence, they find it palatable to call themselves one of Shaolin's own.


3) Again related to the above. Think of the Crusades: a lot of moral instruction was not based on improving people but damage limitation. That's why there are so many ecclesiastical treatises to fighting for the power of god: if you get a group of largely celibate, solely male, 50% or so criminal people in a confined space and teach them fighting you're gonna need to use it. In China it was mainly defending themselves, in the West we could attack the Moslems!

I believe the idle medival knights have to observe something called the Peace of God and the Justice of God? All because they were doing damage to the community (re: economy). So they were reined in by the Bishops and the Barrons through the God route.


These are just a couple of thoughts, not especially backed by any evidence. Feel free to point out flaws in the arguments.

That's a very interesting point. Most of the samurai codes were Confucian, and yes of course were moral codes, but more to the point they were societal codes, enforced by and generated by the mores of the society around them. The written codes that we now know as samurai ethics like bushido and the Hagakure, were all written in peacetime, again as constraints on a bored, powerful, dangerous and often borderline or out-and-out criminal class of unemployed warriors.

Confucianism was more concerned with moral codes and the enforcement of it prior to Song southern dynasty because it has always been the preferred instrutment of the government. But since that time, Confucianism also evolved to personal pursuits of enlightenment thanks to the Neo Confucianism movement started during the Northen Song. They absorded some ideas of both Buddhism and Daoism. Philosophical debates of morality whether it is divine (self imposed) or humanitarian (socially imposed) by Neo Confucians still happening today since that time. Chinese leadship, since Song dynasty, finially woke up to the fact that a smart and strong populace as a whole is better to handle the challenges of truely international or universal level impacts.


So I think the moral codes in all of these societies weren't based on: 'Do this because it makes you good,' just on, 'Don't do this or youll go to hell'. More of a plea for restraint than a moral instruction. Look what's happened to many of the soldiers in Iraq who're highly trained to kill, without the moral component: you have dehumanization on such a scale as Stephen Green who gang-raped and murdered a 14 year old girl and killed her family because according to his own testimony, there was no thrill in just killing people any more.

Moral codes is but an illusion of a temperay peace. It is a slippery slope which Buddhists and Daoists have long recgonized.


The moral instructions of the warrior-monk castes in medieval times and in the orient did as much as they could to build in those restraints, but of course sometimes the killer urges were subjugated by saying, ah well, it's OK to kill them cos they're Moslems... oh bugger, perhaps this is the same now, and perhaps this post is taking a disturbingly political angle...! :eek: :D

Fundamentalist elements in any of the big three religions in the west is basically suffering from a tribal anxiety complex (ie Dominionism). This goes all the way back to the story of Abraham. They all believe they are the elected tribe to carry out their "God's" will. Basically, the world suffers because of a family feud (re.: Ismael-Isaac feud). The worst irony is that it's all because they wanted to control a rock in the middle of desert nowhere. BTW, they certianly provide "God" and his Angels with live reality show entertainment. :D


To the OP: don't be ridiculous, of course not. :p And welcome to the forum! Of course, in this modern world where everyone's supposed to be personal responsible for their actions nobody teaches morals anymore. Can anyone see the breakdown in logic here?! You're supposed to know what right and wrong is, so nobody teaches you, so of course you don't know...! :confused: ... which is why you get a huge breakdown in the church and society, and even the church's moral education has ceased to preach social responsibility outside a very small circle, and now preaches only personal salvation and personal responsibility. I blame the parents.

This is perhaps the most interesting and important part to discuss. But I am going to have lunch first. So hopefully, we could discuss this later.

Mantis108

[Scott R. Brown]

Hi Mr. Punch,

I understand I wasn’t very clear in my point.

It is men/organizations that teach morals and ethics and not the martial arts, which is merely an activity. With Shaolin and Taoists there is an inherent moral foundation that is taught along with their marital arts, generally speaking. There is no inherent morality to martial arts other than what is included by the teacher, is my point. It is up to every individual to decide if they wish to adhere to the ethics they are taught regardless of whether they are taught those ethics within their martial art of choice or learn it from some other source.

Buddhist and Shinto beliefs also affected the martial codes of Japan. Buddhists monks in Japan also practiced the martial arts and remember Bodhidharma was born into the warrior caste in India as well. That means he was well trained in martial arts. In Japan, those with martial skills included some who adhered to a moral code and some who did not just as any where else on the planet. In general a Samurai was supposed to conduct himself with restraint and justice in relation to the lower social classes. This code was taught pre-Shogunate even if it was not formally codified.

It is important to remember that professional warriors are always taught some form of moral code. It is necessary in order to maintain discipline, to deter insurrection and to avoid the needless killing of each other and the peasants who are the individuals who provide for the warriors.

Morals/ethics within the marital arts provide a constraint upon amoral activity that if left unchecked becomes destructive to society. Power must be wielded with discipline or it becomes a danger to the social order.

Just because if we do not agree with the moral codes of a specific group does not mean they do not follow a moral code, their code is merely different than the one we follow. There is even a moral code amongst many criminals.

Many of the Crusaders believed they were freeing the Holy Land from infidels. The fact that they raped and pillaged along they way was not any different than any other army of that era, including the Moslems. Remember the Moslems won the Holy Land and their empire by sword and pillage as well. They were not as nice a guys as some want to believe. The Christians did not do anything that the Moslem's didn’t do to create the Moslem empire. If you look up Sharia Law and how it applied to the time period of the Crusades and you will discover it was not as rosy for non-Moslems as some think it was. The Moslems were not all that fair to non-Moslems. We must be careful not to impose our present day morality onto a world that followed different moral codes. If we tried to live by the generally accepted moral codes of today during that time period it is doubtful we would live very long.

[sanjuro_ronin]

Perhaps we are confusing moral codes with codes of behaviour or rules of engagement or codes of loyalty to ones unit/superiour/lord/emperor ?

There is nothing "moral" about teaching to kill.

Warrior and soldiers fought and killed ( and died) through out the ages not because it was the moral thing to do, but because that was their "job".

Those that tried to find a "deeper meaning" to their training ( not the result of their training) can be commended, but they were hardly "moral" in regards to those outside their "caste", the samurai had no issues and had the right to kill any "low born" non-samurai that they wanted, sometime just to test a blade.
Did they?
Some probably did, most didn't and not out a strict moral code but more out of the simple fact it would be a waste of a perfectly good peasant.

While one can see the duty and loyalty SOME had for their lords, that was out of conditoning more than a strict moral code.

[LoneTiger108]

I have read, seen and chatted about this subject many times with people from all over.

Unfortunately, like most common literature of Martial Arts, the 'Codes of Conduct' often vary from school to school and start to include a 'club rule' ethos like 'keep your nails clean'! This is not the Martial Code of Conduct.

If the truth was out there, written on a stone in the Great Wall or something, would anyone really be interetsed?? I think not.

These days, once money becomes involved, most Martial Rules go out the window IMO...

[sanjuro_ronin]

I have read, seen and chatted about this subject many times with people from all over.

Unfortunately, like most common literature of Martial Arts, the 'Codes of Conduct' often vary from school to school and start to include a 'club rule' ethos like 'keep your nails clean'! This is not the Martial Code of Conduct.

If the truth was out there, written on a stone in the Great Wall or something, would anyone really be interetsed?? I think not.

These days, once money becomes involved, most Martial Rules go out the window IMO...

Pretty much every MA school has a code of conduct, many are even written into the grading certificates.
This is a "new invention" of the 20th century.
Many old Koryu schools like the yagyu-shinkage and the shinto ryu also have codes of conducts from their very early beginnings.
Don't know if they can be viewed as "moral" though.

[1bad65]

one's moral standard was determined by cultural, social, family, religion and one's own perception of the world and relative to others.

This makes alot of sense. I think whether someone is a good or person is part of who they are. MA are just an activity people do.

Some can be used IMO to keep troubled kids busy, like alot of inner city kids stay busy in boxing gyms. Even the PAL programs used boxing as an activity for at risk kids. At the same time guys like Sammy 'The Bull' Gravano took boxing (and made his son box too) for his own reasons.

[David Jamieson]

Is there a method for teaching morals and ethics laid out in the lesson plan for martial arts?

no.

martial arts teaches you how to attack and defend. I mean, it is martial arts and not an ethics class which is mostly scenarios and events and no wrong answer solutions to those.

in martial arts, there is and will always be a wrong answer to a given scenario or event.

What boxer is qualified to teach morals and ethics? Is this not something that is better served in an environment designed to serve the need? A family? a School? A religious entity?

There is room for it and I believe it is often expressed in the oath or statement of how to behave that is usually pinned to teh wall and that's all ya need really imo.

you know, things like: I promise not to show this stuff to just anybody because i feel like showing off or to make the promise not to use it on others who are unable to defend themselves and also to promise to use it for others who are unable to defend themsleves and so on.

but to try and mix kicking and punching with scripture for the sake of it is folly in my opinion. it serves neither end with any efficacy.

[1bad65]

I agree with David. Well said.

But you do know George Foreman is an ordained minister, right? ;)

[Lucas]

I agree with David. Well said.

But you do know George Foreman is an ordained minister, right? ;)

for a small fee....:p

http://openordination.org/?s=adw&key=ordain&gclid=CMCu6-7Yy5ACFQNCgwod1iw7Ww

[SPJ]

nothing to do with ma.

10 commandments for christians.

right speech, right act, right thoughts etc for buddhist.

what goes around comes around.

reap what you sow.

karma.

middle of the road for confusicious people.

in harmony with other people, and everything in the world for daoists.

--

all of the above for me.

:D:)

[scholar]

People choose to be good or they don't. Nobody can impose it from the outside.

People have free will. Martial arts won't teach anyone to be good or bad if the person in question doesn't want to hear it. What does a person value? If they want to be a good person, then no matter what they do, it will eventually lead to that goal if the spirit is right. If a person is on the fence, they at least have to lift a finger to find out why, for themselves, being one way or the other is to their ultimate benefit.

A traditional teaching system that teaches something that has the ability to protect a good person, or a person who thinks that they want to be good, east or west, has arbitrary (or not) character requirements in place for disciplinary purposes - to flunk out the time wasters. The misunderstanding of that arbitrariness is where the common resistance to requirements of morality comes in. "Morality" is abused by people in authority as a means of social control all the time, indeed most of the time. That is why Lao Tzu told his students to put away "morality." If someone has chosen to be good already, insisting on their "morality" is painting sneakers on a snake.

[mantis108]

Is there a method for teaching morals and ethics laid out in the lesson plan for martial arts?

no.

martial arts teaches you how to attack and defend. I mean, it is martial arts and not an ethics class which is mostly scenarios and events and no wrong answer solutions to those.

in martial arts, there is and will always be a wrong answer to a given scenario or event.

What boxer is qualified to teach morals and ethics? Is this not something that is better served in an environment designed to serve the need? A family? a School? A religious entity?

There is room for it and I believe it is often expressed in the oath or statement of how to behave that is usually pinned to teh wall and that's all ya need really imo.

you know, things like: I promise not to show this stuff to just anybody because i feel like showing off or to make the promise not to use it on others who are unable to defend themselves and also to promise to use it for others who are unable to defend themsleves and so on.

but to try and mix kicking and punching with scripture for the sake of it is folly in my opinion. it serves neither end with any efficacy.

I believe Kung Fu, similar to Yoga, belongs to the mystical path. If we look at the first limb of Yoga - Yama (restrain or abstinence) - there are five principles that pretty universally beneficial to any discipline. Non stealing, Non violence/lethal force, Non substance abuse, Celibacy, and Truthfulness, these principles are all important to provide a good start for the mind-body continuum to transcend the mundane phyiscal plane, where actions without the presence of a higher conciousness are often meaningless, to a higher plane.

Martial sports is somewhat of a difficult case. It all depends on the coach IMHO. My point is that there are clear lesson plans that includes ethics and morality in martial arts. It doesn't has to be elaborate. The problem is whether these plan are implimented and enforced by the teacher.

Warm regards

Mantis108

[SPJ]

at a higher level of Kung Fu understanding.

1. skills of hands and legs or 拳脚功夫.

true， we practice our hands and legs to have skills.

2. development of one's courage.

however, not to use it in vain or 逞匹夫之勇

3. most important of all is that we understand how to assess the timing and conditions/posturing of everything in life including fighting.

learn how to evaluate conditions of things, such as timing, odds etc in a fight and life in general or 审时度势

and how to be in harmony with the heaven, people and earth. or tian di ren san he 天地人三合.

study and practice of ma is not only about one and two, but most important the level 3.

--

morals would be in the three harmony part.

:)

[mantis108]

Hi SPJ,

This one for you:

拳理並不等如西方物理。不談心意氣力亦不必多言陰陽剛柔﹐那又何來拳法之可言﹖昊天四府<春>﹑<夏>﹑<秋>﹑<冬>﹔聖人四府<易>﹑<書>﹑<詩>﹑<春秋>﹔拳中四府<法>﹑<勢>﹑<道>﹑<身>﹐是知太極一理﹐用廣體微。人為精氣之物﹐其生于天地之間﹐稟其質于地而法于地﹐故剛柔可論﹐本與五行數序 無乖﹐而秉天之變化行于四時﹐故陰陽可論。老子亦以人法地﹐地法天﹐天法道﹐道法自然。內經以善醫者治本為 首要﹐拳術之設亦以治本為先﹐變化氣質為務﹐服氣返還為其手段﹐故拳術轉弱為強之功為本﹐開啟聰明為用﹐而 搏擊為末技矣﹐今人舍本逐末而以得用世悔敵小道尤沾沾自喜者﹐但以較力量之大小為剛柔之義﹐謂某某拳為剛﹐ 某某拳為柔﹐遂謂剛柔相克﹐泥于小道﹐是不明拳術取象配數之理。

所謂世無無根之木﹐無源之流﹐人之所本者一點真元﹐即天元一氣(理氣)﹐數為氣之用﹐就理而言﹐數為十蓋欲 言其全(理學本之)﹐就氣而言﹐數為九蓋言其用(象數本之)。五行數序水火木金土﹐在拳中即順退(陰符)﹑ 逆進(陽火)﹑左顧(三神)﹑右盼(七星)﹑誠中動直(定之謂也)﹐天地位數生成﹐五十有五(註﹕此言數理 ﹐故言其全)﹐言其質具于地﹔然木火金水﹐土王四季言其氣行于天﹐七八九六﹐精氣為物﹐游魂(鬼神為之類) 為變﹐亦是大衍之數(十日十二辰二十八宿)所以變化為其功﹐而
行鬼神(因應天體能量變化)為其用﹐以勢而言則四擊(打﹑踢或點﹑摔﹑拿)以應四時﹐八法(眼﹑身﹑手﹑身 ﹑步﹑精神﹑氣力﹑功) 而應八節﹐十二型(提綱要領口訣功法)為十二度﹔以身而言﹐天有四時﹐人有四肢(耳目手足)﹐天有八節﹐人 有奇經八脈﹐天有十二度﹐人有十二正經﹐寧不知為法天地一氣之變化者﹖天下門派孰多﹐都不離陰陽﹑剛柔﹑虛 實﹑進退之理﹐丹田出入之竅門。愚意以為武學頂峰乃天人合一﹐內聖外王之道﹐真正功夫所在之處(亦是最是迷 人處)﹐搏擊只是入門初
階﹐未能稱得上是踏足武學殿堂。強分內外是未明理為一本而萬殊之道。道大似不肖﹐多言數窮不如 守中。

Mantis108

[David Jamieson]

to actually "have" kungfu, generally includes a personification of uprightness...at least in my opinion, that's what kungfu is.

but to have and reach for kungfu is a lot more than getting good at martial arts, although that is part of it.

however, your path to kungfu, and my path to kungfu are likely different, but same. :p

stupid zen! :mad: :D

[Shaolinlueb]

In other words, that's when it started being pushed by the government in their martial arts programs and became a more formal aspect of TCMA. Before that, everything was more clannish and gang like (more about family loyalty rather than having any universal code of wu de). I couldn't say if it's true or not, but I think that's what he's referring to.

yes its what I am getting at.


ok shaolin, wudang, like most temples in the past had protectors which were usually the monks there. shaolin was famous for its staff work, wu dang its sword. shaolin also became the basis for many legends and lineages. as for the specific martial art being taoist or buddhist, that was never taught like that in the past. thats one of the modern changes to Martial arts, its like asking a hunter if his rifle is catholic or protestant. I am not saying that is a bad thing, but it is relativly new concept.

most of the morals we see in kung fu movies were based of confucism i believe. i dont study it but the chinese seem to like it a lot.

movies are where we get a big perception of martial arts and how they acted. goes for in USA and CHINA. where in fact movies are movies.

i'm not saying all martial artists didnt have morals, there were many that did. many that didnt.

martial artists in the past were soldiers, bodygaurds, etc, people with no money. (like i said it was looked down upon.). it wasn't looked upon very highly to be one. not until mid to late qing era did that change. most martial artists were soldiers, officers in army, street performers, or bodygaurds, if they didnt have other skills that let them advance.

martial arts was used for killing and protection back in the day. yeah it was to become strong, but if you went to a village, most of the people working the fields had good muscle to them already from their various works. in the cites people were weaker.

sorry if this doesnt fit into your world of "all martial artists were probably like wong fie hung and the "good guys" in the movie 5 deadly venoms."

samurais (sp?) read confucious cause they apreaciated art and stuff too. midevil japan and china are 2 different places. martial arts in china were often poor, this goes back to what i sadi earlier. they couldnt read or write the morals of confucious (not until late qing era and the republic did they start teaching reading and writing), only people with money could learn to read. of course they had the basic morals I am sure.

[doug maverick]

even the gu in five deadly venoms were really bad guys. they were all after the money for their own personal use anyway.

[the Preacher]

Qoh 1 (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV2&byte=2546961)

I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit.

[David Jamieson]

take it outside godboy, this ain't some jesus camp! :p

[sanjuro_ronin]

Qoh 1 (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV2&byte=2546961)

I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit.

You say that as if it is a bad thing :D

[LoneTiger108]

Pretty much every MA school has a code of conduct, many are even written into the grading certificates.
This is a "new invention" of the 20th century.

I think that was what I was referring to as 'Club Conduct'.

The 'Martial Code of Conduct' (Mo Duk) I'm talking of is not a modern invention, as far as I know. It is something that has been in place for a length of time.

On the subject of Morality, I believe the codes speak more of individual 'responsibility' to the arts ancestors and how to 'teach & study' in peace. Obviously this requires a certain disciplined attitude towards others...

[David Jamieson]

we have discussed this before.

essentially, wu de/ mo duk stems from confucian (kung fu tze) principles/ethics.

the shaolin version is similar but has more ch'an(zen) flavour to it as opposed to absolutes with the exception of the absolute "do not kill. for all life is sacred".

[SPJ]

Hi SPJ,

This one for you:

拳理並不等如西方物理。不談心意氣力亦不必多言陰陽剛柔﹐那又何來拳法之可言﹖昊天四府<春>﹑<夏>﹑<秋>﹑<冬>﹔聖人四府<易>﹑<書>﹑<詩>﹑<春秋>﹔拳中四府<法>﹑<勢>﹑<道>﹑<身>﹐是知太極一理﹐用廣體微。人為精氣之物﹐其生于天地之間﹐稟其質于地而法于地﹐故剛柔可論﹐本與五行數序 無乖﹐而秉天之變化行于四時﹐故陰陽可論。老子亦以人法地﹐地法天﹐天法道﹐道法自然。內經以善醫者治本為 首要﹐拳術之設亦以治本為先﹐變化氣質為務﹐服氣返還為其手段﹐故拳術轉弱為強之功為本﹐開啟聰明為用﹐而 搏擊為末技矣﹐今人舍本逐末而以得用世悔敵小道尤沾沾自喜者﹐但以較力量之大小為剛柔之義﹐謂某某拳為剛﹐ 某某拳為柔﹐遂謂剛柔相克﹐泥于小道﹐是不明拳術取象配數之理。

所謂世無無根之木﹐無源之流﹐人之所本者一點真元﹐即天元一氣(理氣)﹐數為氣之用﹐就理而言﹐數為十蓋欲 言其全(理學本之)﹐就氣而言﹐數為九蓋言其用(象數本之)。五行數序水火木金土﹐在拳中即順退(陰符)﹑ 逆進(陽火)﹑左顧(三神)﹑右盼(七星)﹑誠中動直(定之謂也)﹐天地位數生成﹐五十有五(註﹕此言數理 ﹐故言其全)﹐言其質具于地﹔然木火金水﹐土王四季言其氣行于天﹐七八九六﹐精氣為物﹐游魂(鬼神為之類) 為變﹐亦是大衍之數(十日十二辰二十八宿)所以變化為其功﹐而
行鬼神(因應天體能量變化)為其用﹐以勢而言則四擊(打﹑踢或點﹑摔﹑拿)以應四時﹐八法(眼﹑身﹑手﹑身 ﹑步﹑精神﹑氣力﹑功) 而應八節﹐十二型(提綱要領口訣功法)為十二度﹔以身而言﹐天有四時﹐人有四肢(耳目手足)﹐天有八節﹐人 有奇經八脈﹐天有十二度﹐人有十二正經﹐寧不知為法天地一氣之變化者﹖天下門派孰多﹐都不離陰陽﹑剛柔﹑虛 實﹑進退之理﹐丹田出入之竅門。愚意以為武學頂峰乃天人合一﹐內聖外王之道﹐真正功夫所在之處(亦是最是迷 人處)﹐搏擊只是入門初
階﹐未能稱得上是踏足武學殿堂。強分內外是未明理為一本而萬殊之道。道大似不肖﹐多言數窮不如 守中。

Mantis108

this is an outstanding post.

:)

[LoneTiger108]

Sorry to disagree here, but Mo Duk comes from Military IMO.

The Military does not study Confucist principles until they return home! Obviously Ch'an versions will have elements of Buddhism too which will vary from Wudang (Taoist) schools also.

What I would like to 'hear' or 'see' is someone present a jpeg or something that highlights these rules or codes of conduct. These principles 'must' be written down, especially the Ch'an versions IMO.

So, please someone show something that we can discuss in depth, if that is the intention of this thread...

[SPJ]

I think that was what I was referring to as 'Club Conduct'.

The 'Martial Code of Conduct' (Mo Duk) I'm talking of is not a modern invention, as far as I know. It is something that has been in place for a length of time.

On the subject of Morality, I believe the codes speak more of individual 'responsibility' to the arts ancestors and how to 'teach & study' in peace. Obviously this requires a certain disciplined attitude towards others...

there is no morality in destruction and taking away lives.

geneva convention after wwi, no poison gas, no chemical weapon, no torturing and fair treatment of prisoner of war???

--

some cultural background.

1. during the spring and autumn and warring periods, there were wars upon wars in China, people were professional soldiers such as Sun Wu or Sun Zi, it is a profession, yes, they were bound by loyalty and being just etc etc. there were certain conduct codes already. bin jia or profession of military was highly looked up to.

2. in song dynasty, since the first emperor of song was from a general, he purposely took away the ranks of the generals that helped him to the throne, so nobody may be risen up to be an emperor just like him. being a fighter or a soldier was looked down upon purposely since then. that was why song was pacifying strong neighbors with golds and concessions. Song was the weakest dynasty in Chinese history as far as dealing with neighboring tribes and kingdoms.

3. civilian secret societies and codes were most prominent in Ming's first emperor Zhu Yuan Zhang. that was how he defeated mongolians.

4. Su lu tang wroted books and introduced philosophies into practice of tai chi, xing yi and ba gua. the practice of MA would be part of character building and understanding of one's health and relation to others and the world.

the fighting people were always bound by certain rules.

good or bad, even robbers from the mountains or robbers on horse, they would have certain rules.

--

passing a school or style, or even just entering dicipleship, the potential students will be evaluated on character first, if worthy, then moving forward, if not, he or she will be dismissed.

--

in short, there were and still are rules, as long as there are more than one people, we have to have some rules to go by or governing--

--

[sanjuro_ronin]

In terms of warfare, "rules" started to be used when the objectives of war started to get destroyed in battle, what good is invading and occupying a country when the people you will tax are dead and their crops destroyed?

Even raping and pilaging becmae "legislated" by superiours, at least the smart ones did.

It had very little to do with morals and ethics and more to do with self interests.

[doug maverick]

Does Martial Arts teach any morality?:confused:
or Not?






Eph. 6 (http://quod.lib.umich.edu/cgi/k/kjv/kjv-idx?type=DIV2&byte=5197699)

Put on the whole armour of God,
that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil.
For we wrestle not against flesh and blood,
but against principalities, against powers,
against the rulers of the darkness of this world,
against spiritual wickedness in high places.

Wherefore take unto you the whole armour of God,
that ye may be able to withstand in the evil day,
and having done all, to stand.

Stand therefore, having your loins girt about with truth,
and having on the breastplate of righteousness;
And your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel of peace;
Above all, taking the shield of faith,
wherewith ye shall be able to quench all the fiery darts of the wicked.
And take the helmet of salvation,
and the sword of the Spirit,
which is the word of God:

excellent passage excellent

[David Jamieson]

many of the "heroes" of the old testament were nothing more than mass murderers.

you can butter that and suger it up as much as you like, but i'd dump that old testamnet completely from christianity if it was up to me.

but it's not up to me and so, people will continue to use their religion to prp up their hate and intolerance which in my opinion is the ****hest thing from any sort of morality.

[doug maverick]

doesn;t matter still a good quote.

[David Jamieson]

yes it's a good quote, but it has nothing to do with martial arts. It is analogy.

[LoneTiger108]

there is no morality in destruction and taking away lives...

... or even just entering dicipleship, the potential students will be evaluated on character first, if worthy, then moving forward, if not, he or she will be dismissed.

in short, there were and still are rules, as long as there are more than one people, we have to have some rules to go by or governing

I agree with you here SPJ, and thanks for the history. Again, what I was talking of was the 'codes of conduct' not really the 'morality of fighting or killing'.

Interesting to see peoples views here though, and the obvious religious overtones like 'Put on the whole armour of God' Didn't Jackie Chan do this? :D