Why are you interested in TCMA history?

[YouKnowWho]

I have over 200 TCMA books. I always skip the history part. The reason is simple. No matter how good some ancient TCMA guys were, it has nothing to do with my own TCMA ability. Can someone explain why the TCMA history is interest or important?

[Kellen Bassette]

Because, if you are aware that in ancient times, Kung Fu was meant to develop fighting skill; you won't be to hide behind "tradition" as an excuse to practice Kung Fu as just a performance art.

[YouKnowWho]

Will you hate when someone makes the following statement in his book (this are exactly the words that I had translated from a book)?

- My teacher's teacher used to be able to spit out a sword from his mouth and kill his enemy 300 miles away.
- My teacher used to be able to spit out a sword from his mouth and kill his enemy 300 feet away.
- I used to be able to spit out a nuts from my mouth and hit on a tree trunk. Since my high blood pressure, I no longer be able to do that.

If I write a book, I'll include the following:

- My teacher's teacher could stay in horse stance and finish eating his dinner.
- My teacher could stay in horse stance and finish watching Beijing opera.
- I used to be able to stay in horse stance and finish drinking my beer. Since my high blood pressure, I no longer be able to do that.

[sanjuro_ronin]

I like the historical parts because they tend to give us SOME insight into why an art came to be.

[mawali]

My preference is to study with the old teachers of yore then read about them later.
When I met Lu Hungping (seminar format) he was already in his late 70's, somewhat hard of hearing but his instruction was worth the short time and effort. I tried to find information about him in TCMA book but could hardly do so. A former teacher (Prof Hou Chi Kwang) heard his name and I believe the 2 met up while in my local area. I add that TCMA history (post 1955- I am guessing here) often leaves out those people "who do not give face" to the present state of affairs so there is a lot of bias in post 1960s exposition of CMA masters. There are people who, although not left out but since they cannot be ignored, very little information is given. Often, informal relationshops tend to be downgraded if not official in knowledge so that often leaves a void by non mentioning of important personages in CMA. This leaves a lot of innuendo to be taken and made up in the absence of true and validated information. This has been my experience when talking with, a few CMA teachers I have had. Again, much stuff is left out and based on my teachers responses, I have validated that modus operandi.

It beez like dat!

[GeneChing]

Here is the definition of 'tradition' according to Merriam-Webster (http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/tradition):

a way of thinking, behaving, or doing something that has been used by the people in a particular group, family, society, etc., for a long time
: the stories, beliefs, etc., that have been part of the culture of a group of people for a long time
—used to say that someone has qualities which are like the qualities of another well-known person or group of people from the past

Note the terms 'long time, and 'from the past'. All tradition means really is a connection to the past so to use the term, you must know your history. Martial myopia has twisted up the term to mean something stagnant, which is really a shame. I think a lot of this comes out of translation error. The term in Chinese - chuantong 传统 - is slightly different. Chuan means summon, propagate, or transmit, which is close. Tong means govern, command, control or unite. Of course, this is a new term, developed in juxtaposition with modern wushu. The real distinction here is between sport and non-sport martial practices. By a strict definition of the word 'traditional' you can argue that modern wushu is in fact traditional because it descends from traditional culture, as do all modern manifestations of martial arts. But that just confuses the nibblers, and I digress... ;)

[SPJ]

Any history is about who what where and when.

Of course we are more interested in how in MA.

Otherwise, they are just anecdotes of who can do what.

That is nothing to do if we are able to do just who could do that in history.

There.

:rolleyes:

[Wuxia007]

It's important because that's how you begin to determine between fact and fiction. If you study it long and well enough, you will begin to see contradictions or potential signs of it. TCMA history is interesting to study because it is full of hearsay, legends, myths, etc. which make it a challenge for historians to unlock the truth, to figure out where the contradictions are, to answer questions about its link and influence to society at the time. Western history is boring to study because there isn't a whole lot that hasn't already been discovered or proven. There's no puzzle to figure out, no challenge. It's all conveniently available at your fingertips in your grade school history books.

[Lucas]

Tcma history is interesting to me for the same reason most all other types of world history are. I enjoy reading history


Tcma history is not relevant to a modern day personal physical conflict.

As an overall portion of studies history of tcma can be fun to see how progression and development took place,and what influenced those changes.

[jimbob]

It's interesting in the same way my family history is interesting. I like to see where I came from and get an idea of what the people were like before me.

I enjoy a good story. If I read about someone spitting swords out of their mouths and killing enemies I'd enjoy it for being a good story.

Beyond that, it doesn't really impact on me at all.

[Faux Newbie]

In some ways, it can be useful to know the history, as you can see what aspects are progressions for fighting, and what aspects are progressions for other things.

[mickey]

Greetings,

History can help connect one to a tradition in an intimate way. Practice is another. History inspires the practice. That is the message usually. Practice hard and you will achieve something really good.

I was going to contact YKW to ask if would write a book that defined the throw by its traditional name and included other aliases for that throw. Sometimes, those descriptions can help sensitize the practitioner to other energies involved. This also applies to modern acupuncture. The traditional names give insight to how the chi flows through a particular point. The way that it is now completely sucks.

One of the best videos to come for Wing Lam Enterprises was the Chin Na video demonstrating the kungs (gongs). I called him at that time to suggest that he continue in that direction. Needless to say, I don't have that kind of pull. The kungs are the backbone of TCMA and are an essential part of its "history".

Additionally, understand the history of a particular endeavor is not a unique thing. It is found in music, dance, art, the sciences, etc.


mickey

[pazman]

I'm not a historian, but it is good to understand the context of your art.

If you want to say gong fu is about fighting and self-defense, and you also train sword and spear, then you aren't being honest with yourself.

If you want to say gong fu is about traditional battlefield combat, and train with flimsy opera spear and flexible sword, then you aren't being honest with yourself.

If you want to say that most gong fu isn't entirely applicable to daily needs but is fun and interesting, then you might be honest with yourself.

Knowing a bit of history also allows one to sniff the bull**** that some schools say to increase their legitimacy, like kenpo schools who claim lineage to the Shaolin temple.

[Rover]

Those parts about their histories are another way of saying :
'''This is ORIGINAL SHAOLIN GONG FU,so you can train without any doubt all the techniques,no bull****.'''''

[tc101]

Those parts about their histories are another way of saying :
'''This is ORIGINAL SHAOLIN GONG FU,so you can train without any doubt all the techniques,no bull****.'''''

Yes I think if we replaced the word "history" every time with the word "stories" or "legends" then we might get a better picture.

So change the question to why are we interested in TCMA stories or legends?

[MarathonTmatt]

Yes I think if we replaced the word "history" every time with the word "stories" or "legends" then we might get a better picture.

So change the question to why are we interested in TCMA stories or legends?

Are stories and legends not as validated as written history?

People who kept great written records were Egyptians, Romans, (Egyptian thought influenced early Greek and Roman thought greatly). Usually large empires (ie China). The Mayans kept records but were mostly destroyed by the Conquistadors. In North America, records we can still see were recorded in Petroforms, rock art, stone pecking, etc. In other cases, birch bark scrolls were used, and Wampum belts. Some claim that the Cherokee alphabet, attributed to being written by George Guess in the 1800's, was actually a different version of their already existing alphabet that George Guess revised to match up with English better.

What about folk traditions and the oral tradition of the rest of the world- what about when mythology of the cosmos (astro-theology) that all cultures around the world expressed, and how this helped people understand when to plant, harvest, move on to another village, etc. In this way, a serpent-god legend that is passed down through oral tradition could just sound like a fanciful story to the untrained person, but actually has it's roots in the cosmology and belief system of a people (when certain constellations appear, etc.), who would need to understand this in their everyday/seasonal activities.

As far as martial arts I understand there may be exaggerated claims about a war general, or a great Emperor, but those claims (history becoming legend) should be understood better in their context. Why would it be important to remember certain iconic figures in such a way. Why are certain places like Mount Wudang, or Mount Hua, so relevant, and thus martial arts styles associated with these places (even if there is a lack of hard-core evidence of an art originating there). It almost seems like something in the conscious memory of the people that makes it important. Why are the 8 Immortals so benevolent? What is the source of their power? What lessons may we learn from them that we can incorporate into our understanding of human behavior, etc.

[tc101]

Are stories and legends not as validated as written history?

People who kept great written records were Egyptians, Romans, (Egyptian thought influenced early Greek and Roman thought greatly). Usually large empires (ie China). The Mayans kept records but were mostly destroyed by the Conquistadors. In North America, records we can still see were recorded in Petroforms, rock art, stone pecking, etc. In other cases, birch bark scrolls were used, and Wampum belts. Some claim that the Cherokee alphabet, attributed to being written by George Guess in the 1800's, was actually a different version of their already existing alphabet that George Guess revised to match up with English better.

What about folk traditions and the oral tradition of the rest of the world- what about when mythology of the cosmos (astro-theology) that all cultures around the world expressed, and how this helped people understand when to plant, harvest, move on to another village, etc. In this way, a serpent-god legend that is passed down through oral tradition could just sound like a fanciful story to the untrained person, but actually has it's roots in the cosmology and belief system of a people (when certain constellations appear, etc.), who would need to understand this in their everyday/seasonal activities.

As far as martial arts I understand there may be exaggerated claims about a war general, or a great Emperor, but those claims (history becoming legend) should be understood better in their context. Why would it be important to remember certain iconic figures in such a way. Why are certain places like Mount Wudang, or Mount Hua, so relevant, and thus martial arts styles associated with these places (even if there is a lack of hard-core evidence of an art originating there). It almost seems like something in the conscious memory of the people that makes it important. Why are the 8 Immortals so benevolent? What is the source of their power? What lessons may we learn from them that we can incorporate into our understanding of human behavior, etc.

It just shows how people really really really want to believe their stories and legends. There is value to Chinese legends and stories just like there is value in the old Greek legends and myths only no one bothers to argue that they are or need to be true or that they in some way have any bearing on martial art.

[MarathonTmatt]

It just shows how people really really really want to believe their stories and legends. There is value to Chinese legends and stories just like there is value in the old Greek legends and myths only no one bothers to argue that they are or need to be true or that they in some way have any bearing on martial art.

Sounds reasonable... agreed!

[sanjuro_ronin]

There is always some merit to MA stories and legends and myths.
The problem is when people think that the stories are more important than the doing or that THEY KNOW what those stories really mean and no one else does.
EX:
The story of wing chun being created by a nun that saw a fight between a snake and a crane.

Did it happen? We do NOT know.
Is it a cool story that underlines certain point about WC?
Yes.
Does it matter if the story is true at all? Nope.
Do you have to fight like a "snake' or a "crane" to be able to do WC?
Hell NO !
We are humans, nothing but humans and we fight *gasp* like humans.
So the story is good regardless of being true or not AND it can convey key points about the system BUT becomes a "bad thing" when people more focused on "sell something" than on using that the system was developed for ( fighting) make it to be more important than the reason someone developed the system.

Now, before someone chimes in on we don't know the reason someone developed a MA system:
Yes, we do know the reason why every single fighting system was developed and that is: TO FIGHT WITH.
(hopefully well enough to survive).

[Vajramusti]

[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;1269103]There is always some merit to MA stories and legends and myths.
The problem is when people think that the stories are more important than the doing or that THEY KNOW what those stories really mean and no one else does.
EX:
The story of wing chun being created by a nun that saw a fight between a snake and a crane.

Did it happen? We do NOT know.
Is it a cool story that underlines certain point about WC?
Yes.
Does it matter if the story is true at all? Nope.
Do you have to fight like a "snake' or a "crane" to be able to do WC?
Hell NO !
We are humans, nothing but humans and we fight *gasp* like humans.
So the story is good regardless of being true or not AND it can convey key points about the system BUT becomes a "bad thing" when people more focused on "sell something" than on using that the system was developed for ( fighting) make it to be more important than the reason someone developed the system.
------------------------------------------------------------
Some stories are useful in understanding the origins of a style, some stories are really metaphors, some are lies , few are
objective histories.
The snake and crane are not to be taken literally but aspects of the metaphors involved can give insights on motion.
But I am not here to preach.

[Rover]

Oral stories of nations are not reliable sources for history since they are created,chanced and affected by people who are tend to overstate national or cultural values.
All of the Chinese ma systems claim to having been came from temple of Shaolin,yet you will not find two exact same systems no matter how 100% shaolin made they say they are.Just like today,the name 'Shaolin' was used for advertising.Like putting Nike or Adidas logo on your stuff to sell them.

[Vajramusti]

Oral stories of nations are not reliable sources for history since they are affected by people whom tend to overstate national or cultural values.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

And this is truth and the rest is lies
The flower that once has bloomed,
Forever dies

From the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayam

[r.(shaolin)]

Yes I think if we replaced the word "history" every time with the word "stories" or "legends" then we might get a better picture.

So change the question to why are we interested in TCMA stories or legends?

Are stories important to training sports/competition martial arts? I would say no, although IMO discounting ‘lineage stories’ diminishes even 'sport martial arts' greatly. Are ‘lineage stories/myths’ important to martial arts training when a life or death encounter is the reality? Absolutely. Stories are about collaboration and connection with the past. They transcend generations, they engage us through emotions and are the pathway to engaging our right brain and triggering our imagination. By engaging our imagination, we become participants in the narrative and gain knowledge and skill which otherwise only real experience can give us. Stories are how we humans think, how we are wired. To the human brain, imagined experiences are processed the same as real experiences. Stories create genuine emotions, presence (being in an actual situation), and behavioural responses. Physical training teaches us only about 25% of a skill set, strong, emotionally connected narrative does the rest. Stories have always been a primal form of teaching, one of man’s most powerful tools especially when teaching and learning life and death skills. Recent research has confirmed this. When individuals are under intense psychological stress, as in a life and death situations and the ‘reptilian coping brain’ kicks in, skills learned only though physical practice and repetition fall to the wayside. Stories passed on from one fireman to another, one SWAT team member to an other, one warrior to another, have saved many a life, and yes the story has to be a good one.
r.
www.shaolinwushu.com (http://www.shaolinwushu.com)

[Vajramusti]

Are stories important to training sports/competition martial arts? I would say no, although IMO discounting ‘lineage stories’ diminishes even these sport martial arts greatly. Are ‘lineage stories/myths’ important to martial arts training when a life or death encounter is the reality? Absolutely. Stories are about collaboration and connection with the past. They transcend generations, they engage us through emotions and are the pathway to engaging our right brain and triggering our imagination. By engaging our imagination, we become participants in the narrative and gain knowledge and skill which otherwise only real experience can give us. Stories are how we humans think, how we are wired. To the human brain, imagined experiences are processed the same as real experiences. Stories create genuine emotions, presence (being in an actual situation), and behavioural responses. Physical training teaches us only about 25% of a skill set, strong, emotionally connected narrative does the rest. Stories have always been a primal form of teaching, one of man’s most powerful tools especially when teaching and learning life and death skills. Recent research is confirmed this. When individuals are under intense psychological stress, as in a life and death situations, the ‘reptilian coping brain’ kicks in and skills learned only though physical practice and repetition, fall to the wayside. Stories passed on from one fireman to another, one SWAT team member to an other, one warrior to another, have saved many a life, and yes the story has to be a good one.
r.
www.shaolinwushu.com (http://www.shaolinwushu.com)
-----------------------------------------
I very much like the above post.

[Rover]

To the human brain, imagined experiences are processed the same as real experiences.



Mister,that is something i'll be thinking on and ponder for days.Thanks for it. :rolleyes:

[Faux Newbie]

Mister,that is something i'll be thinking on and ponder for days.Thanks for it. :rolleyes:

Traditionally, thought was considered another sense in Chinese philosophy, consciousness not. For instance, the Buddhist idea of samsara, the world of cause and effect, hold causes that often find their source in sensory input, to which one may respond. So, an intruding thought in meditation was considered no different than the sensation of a mosquito landing on you. Thus, what you imagine creates responses that treat them as real.

[Rover]

Traditionally, thought was considered another sense in Chinese philosophy, consciousness not. For instance, the Buddhist idea of samsara, the world of cause and effect, hold causes that often find their source in sensory input, to which one may respond. So, an intruding thought in meditation was considered no different than the sensation of a mosquito landing on you. Thus, what you imagine creates responses that treat them as real.

From the Matrix :
''What is real. How do you define real? If you're talking about what you can feel, what you can smell, what you can taste and see, then real is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain. This is the world that you know.''

[David Jamieson]

From the Matrix :
''What is real. How do you define real? If you're talking about what you can feel, what you can smell, what you can taste and see, then real is simply electrical signals interpreted by your brain. This is the world that you know.''

A lot of history from any nation is outright propaganda.
People fear truth because it makes them have to work harder. lol

[sanjuro_ronin]

It is important to understand that the way history was written in ancient times differs to how it is written today.
Although there is still bias today of course.
That said, the crucial facts tend to me real when it comes to the history of nations ( there are always dissenting voices and the criteria of embarrassment for example) and not so much when it comes to MA myths/legends that were NOT meant to be historical truths from the very beginning.

[madhusudan]

I've enjoyed reading some of the recent posts in this thread and agree with the general consensus. Allegory is symbolic. It is very dense to take it literally. Many (most?) people are stuck in linear, left-brain, physical-only, literal thinking and have trouble discerning the intended meaning of ancient stories, myths and legends. Once you release that tight grip, the meaning is often clear.

[GeneChing]

Martial Arts history can teach you what to fight for...

[sanjuro_ronin]

Martial Arts history can teach you what to fight for...

Only one thing worth fighting for:
8567

[hskwarrior]

Man, share the history on that one there......
you now have my attention :D

[Jimbo]

As a kid, I used to love reading about the histories of different styles, particularly CMA styles. And out of those, I thought the most interesting were the written histories (or practitioners' exploits) of Xingyi and Bagua. I actually more or less believed a lot of it, including accounts of practitioners using their superior style and 'chi' to knock opponents 30 feet away and killing multiple attackers with zero effort. Some of those stories of early practitioners imbued them with near-Christlike powers. I felt that some CMA styles must be inherently better than others, even though I never actually trained either Xingyi or Bagua.

I also realized that the historical accounts of virtually every CMA style seemed fantastic to some degree or other, in sharp contrast to those of JMA. Even within one system, the accounts would vary from one version to another.

Then I grew up, and through personal observation, critical thinking and experience (and living overseas for many years), I realized that most of what I had read as written histories were fanciful tales...exaggerations or fictitious accounts to glorify the various systems/masters. I also realized that (for the most part, though there are big exceptions like those of the 'internal' systems) that the historical accounts of more recently-developed or known systems from the 19th century were far more believable/reality-based. Now, either CMA masters of ancient times had godlike powers that were lost to more recent practitioners, or they were legends similar to Beowulf. Yes, humans can be capable of many incredible feats, but there is a line between actual history and tall tales. Why couldn't modern masters duplicate the legendary feats of the past? I realized that it was the quality of the individual practitioner, not the system/style itself, that determined superiority. I still respect Xingyi and Bagua, but take those old histories I read with a grain of salt. They're great systems (as are all good MA) without the need for historical embellishment.

Nowadays, I rarely read about CMA history anymore, due to this intertwining of fact and outright fantasy. There are some more recent books that are actual historical studies, like Brian Kennedy's books. Those are very good.

[pazman]

I wish Bawang would post in this thread.

Years ago, finding real history on TCMA in the USA was nearly impossible. These days we can download ancient manuals for free, consult with scholars by email, and easily travel through rural China. There are many mysteries yet to solve and many historical holes to be filled, but why so many schools still teach fantasy as fact, I have no idea.

[YouKnowWho]

Do I care if my teacher's teacher's teacher's ancestor came from Mongolia? Do I care if the Baoding SC system originally came from the Mongolian SC system? The art has been evolved so much in the past 200 years. Even the flying side kick has been added into the system as "entering strategy". The current status is what I'm interested. I truly don't care what it was 200 years ago.

[tc101]

Do I care if my teacher's teacher's teacher's ancestor came from Mongolia? Do I care if the Baoding SC system originally came from the Mongolian SC system? The art has been evolved so much in the past 200 years. Even the flying side kick has been added into the system as "entering strategy". The current status is what I'm interested. I truly don't care what it was 200 years ago.

That's because you are really doing it. The history buffs are guys who aren't doing it.

[pazman]

Do I care if my teacher's teacher's teacher's ancestor came from Mongolia? Do I care if the Baoding SC system originally came from the Mongolian SC system? The art has been evolved so much in the past 200 years. Even the flying side kick has been added into the system as "entering strategy". The current status is what I'm interested. I truly don't care what it was 200 years ago.

You may not care about the history, but you know the history. You are honest with yourself. A guy who dresses in silk pajamas, twirls a staff around as if he were an opera performer, and thinks what he does is either relevant to today's situation or somehow related to what Shaolin monks practiced 500 years ago, is completely deluded, because he refuses to learn the history.

[Rover]

I also realized that the historical accounts of virtually every CMA style seemed fantastic to some degree or other, in sharp contrast to those of JMA. Even within one system, the accounts would vary from one version to another.



A good example to this would be the Southern Mantis.The system has really few generations but still you will find five branches with different names and stories.

[No_Know]

If I find a flip open non-3G cell phone three hundred years in the future I could just use it as I see fit as you do with TCMA as...fighting techniques with tactics of today. I'll move it, undo the power adapter cover, remove the back cover, have the battery fall out, put back the battery, put the cover back on and think what elaborateness for something that has no apparent use that to take it apart--valueless.

I like the history as it can have clues to how it was supposedly used or would ideally be used. Who Where when and with whom is like provenience.

No_Know

[YouKnowWho]

I find an ancient wresting picture. Do I want to wrestle like this? Of course not!

8584

[PalmStriker]

Practicing Kung Fu without absorbing the history/culture is like eating Chinese food with sour sauce only. :( https://www.google.com/search?q=sweet+and+sour+sauce,+china+history&client=firefox-a&hs=sGt&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&channel=sb&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=IVSKU8fjOMuPqgaVv4EY&ved=0CJIBELAE&biw=1440&bih=799#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=GvKrNeKmkXHDEM%253A%3B6LmuwG2NpPaOAM%3Bhttp% 253A%252F%252Fwww.gotohz.com%252Fhzlywywb%252Fdisc overhangzhou%252Fthingstodo%252Fcuisine%252F201307 %252FW020130722354007863460.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%2 52Fwww.gotohz.com%252Fhzlywywb%252Fdiscoverhangzho u%252Fthingstodo%252Fcuisine%252F201307%252Ft20130 707_84972.shtml%3B700%3B504

[pazman]

I find an ancient wresting picture. Do I want to wrestle like this? Of course not!

8584

Mr. Wang, you might say that, but deep in your heart, you know you want to.:p

[tc101]

Practicing Kung Fu without absorbing the history/culture is like eating Chinese food with sour sauce only. :(

I have found in my experience typically the history and culture buffs are into the role playing side to martial arts.

[RenDaHai]

Of course History is important and necessary. Here is a Quote from Diodorus of Sicily;

'History offers us a schooling safe from the pitfalls of life through a presentation of events that have proved advantageous in the experience of others'.

A fine way to describe form also. Do you practice form? Do you study the techniques passed down from before? This IS history. ALL traditional Kung fu is history. If you ignore the history, then you ignore the tradition. If you ignore this, you are not studying the Kung fu style you claim to. Sure, you are still studying martial arts, and if your mechanistic mind reduces kung fu entirely to 'martial arts' then that is precisely what you are training. If this is your only interest then that is fine and all success to you, but do not believe that it is you who are seeking kung fu and call the traditionalists pretenders.

Any of the myriad disciplines of Kung fu is an indivisible whole. It comes from a culture not as suited to reductionist thinking as ours, and a time where reducing such a discipline to its constituents was impractical. You may not believe that a whole is more than the sum of its parts. You may think you can exceed Kung fu by isolating the specific techniques that work relative to your specific training method in your limited experience, ignoring all other aspects of the style. But when you do this do not userp the name of 'KungFu'. Even if you can defeat all the kung fu masters of the world with your method, do not be persuaded that you have the real kung fu, because kung fu is irreducible to one quantity to be matched.

If you want to be a good martial artist and take what bits of Kung fu suite you then that is fine but don't think you are the master of kung fu. Similarly if you are the opposite, a traditionalist, do not think because you understand some deeper aspects of Kung fu that makes you a better martial artist than those who don't. It does not.



History is passed down to teach you something. Don't ignore it, or believe it. Try to LEARN something from it. When we say 'this style was created by a woman' what does that teach you? Women cannot match men at strength, a style invented by a woman relies on structure not strength. Its strikes rely on stabbing weak points rather than bludgeoning. Remember this history as you train and you can correct yourself.

[r.(shaolin)]

Well said.
r.


Of course History is important and necessary. Here is a Quote from Diodorus of Sicily;

'History offers us a schooling safe from the pitfalls of life through a presentation of events that have proved advantageous in the experience of others'.

A fine way to describe form also. Do you practice form? Do you study the techniques passed down from before? This IS history. ALL traditional Kung fu is history. If you ignore the history, then you ignore the tradition. If you ignore this, you are not studying the Kung fu style you claim to. Sure, you are still studying martial arts, and if your mechanistic mind reduces kung fu entirely to 'martial arts' then that is precisely what you are training. If this is your only interest then that is fine and all success to you, but do not believe that it is you who are seeking kung fu and call the traditionalists pretenders.

Any of the myriad disciplines of Kung fu is an indivisible whole. It comes from a culture not as suited to reductionist thinking as ours, and a time where reducing such a discipline to its constituents was impractical. You may not believe that a whole is more than the sum of its parts. You may think you can exceed Kung fu by isolating the specific techniques that work relative to your specific training method in your limited experience, ignoring all other aspects of the style. But when you do this do not userp the name of 'KungFu'. Even if you can defeat all the kung fu masters of the world with your method, do not be persuaded that you have the real kung fu, because kung fu is irreducible to one quantity to be matched.

If you want to be a good martial artist and take what bits of Kung fu suite you then that is fine but don't think you are the master of kung fu. Similarly if you are the opposite, a traditionalist, do not think because you understand some deeper aspects of Kung fu that makes you a better martial artist than those who don't. It does not.



History is passed down to teach you something. Don't ignore it, or believe it. Try to LEARN something from it. When we say 'this style was created by a woman' what does that teach you? Women cannot match men at strength, a style invented by a woman relies on structure not strength. Its strikes rely on stabbing weak points rather than bludgeoning. Remember this history as you train and you can correct yourself.

[PalmStriker]

I have found in my experience typically the history and culture buffs are into the role playing side to martial arts. :) The typical academic/historian isn't into practicing MA at all, may go to the gym for exercise, though, like many who work at desk jobs with Jedi Swords hidden from their co-workers.

[r.(shaolin)]

-----------------------------------------
I very much like the above post.

Here is a story you might enjoy (http://www.shaolinwushu.com/#!If-you-want-to-change-the-world/ctb8/6CC3FE05-7B7B-4962-B9F4-12EB0B3DF2CE).

r.
www.shaolinwushu.com (http://www.shaolinwushu.com)

[Vajramusti]

Here is a story you might enjoy (http://www.shaolinwushu.com/#!If-you-want-to-change-the-world/ctb8/6CC3FE05-7B7B-4962-B9F4-12EB0B3DF2CE).

r.
www.shaolinwushu.com (http://www.shaolinwushu.com)
--------------------------------------------
I enjoyed the story even though I am an Okie transplant -not a Texan.

[tc101]

Are stories important to training sports/competition martial arts?


Yes all the evidence proves this true.



Stories are how we humans think, how we are wired. To the human brain, imagined experiences are processed the same as real experiences. Stories create genuine emotions, presence (being in an actual situation), and behavioural responses.


It is one way we think. You admit we don't need stories to train or compete in sport.



Physical training teaches us only about 25% of a skill set, strong, emotionally connected narrative does the rest.


You just made this up that does not make it true. It is also inconsistent with your admission that stories not important for sports.



Stories have always been a primal form of teaching, one of man’s most powerful tools especially when teaching and learning life and death skills. Recent research has confirmed this. When individuals are under intense psychological stress, as in a life and death situations and the ‘reptilian coping brain’ kicks in, skills learned only though physical practice and repetition fall to the wayside.


Stories do not teach skills. Skills are the ability to do something and you only get and get better at skills through practice that is practicing doing that something. Can stories teach you to juggle or make you better at juggling? Do you think stories can only teach your so called life and death skills but not regular skills? Why would that be?

The other thing is there is no such thing as life and death skills. There are only skills that you find yourself needing to use in a life threatening situation but these skills are just fighting skills. Striking, dealing with punches, being able to escape the mount, being able to deal with a shoot, being able to fill in the blank these are not things that only come into play when your are fighting with your life but whenever you fight.

Physical skills do not fall by the wayside when faced with a life threatening situation. Where do you get this idea? As ex military I can tell you that is not true.

Here's the thing if you do not have physical skills you have nothing and if you are ever in a life threatening situation and I have been there a few times I can tell you that you won't remember or access stories. Your reptilian brain lol does not think in stories reptiles aren't literary. Things happen incredibly fast. If it is not engrained habit you will not have when you need it.



Stories passed on from one fireman to another, one SWAT team member to an other, one warrior to another, have saved many a life, and yes the story has to be a good one.


I am a LEO. These so called stories you mention involve situational experience in real life. Those are not stories in the sense we are talking about the stories in Chinese martial art.

[r.(shaolin)]

Yes all the evidence proves this true. . .
It is one way we think. You admit we don't need stories to train or compete in sport.
You just made this up that does not make it true. . . . It is also inconsistent with your admission that stories not important for sports.
Stories do not teach skills. Skills are the ability to do something and you only get and get better at skills through practice that is practicing doing that something. .



Are stories important to training sports/competition martial arts? I would say no, although IMO discounting ‘lineage stories’ diminishes even 'sport martial arts' greatly.
I would agree that actual "practicing doing that something" is very important and that mental simulation is not as good as actually doing something, but it is the next best thing, and very useful in teaching 'life or death' skills because putting one self into a life threatening situation is generally not practical.
In checking my source I did have the percentage wrong. "Overall mental practice alone produced about two thirds of the benefits of actual physical practice." I'm quoting from Chip Heath's book, "Made to Stick". He made that claim in reference to a review of thirty-five studies featuring 3,214 participants. Chip is a professor of organizational behaviour in the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University. (Heath Chip. 2007. Made to Stick, New York: Random House, pg. 204-237)

r.

[Jimbo]

I would agree that actual "practicing doing that something" is very important and that mental simulation is not as good as actually doing something, but it is the next best thing, and very useful in teaching 'life or death' skills because putting one self into a life threatening situation is generally not practical.
In checking my source I did have the percentage wrong. "Overall mental practice alone produced about two thirds of the benefits of actual physical practice." I'm quoting from Chip Heath's book, "Made to Stick". He made that claim in reference to a review of thirty-five studies featuring 3,214 participants. Chip is a professor of organizational behaviour in the Graduate School of Business at Stanford University. (Heath Chip. 2007. Made to Stick, New York: Random House, pg. 204-237)

r.

I agree that the mental aspect is a very important part of practicing any skill. One really cannot separate the mental from the physical. Even though if and when it comes time to act in an actual situation, instinct/training takes over, and in that case 'over-thinking' becomes a detriment.

However, I personally see no value in clearly fictitious, fanciful accounts, such as stories of masters with superhuman powers being passed off as true history. If taken as truth, these types of "historical accounts" can/will lead to delusional thinking. I'm not talking about some stories that might have been allegories, but stories that were manufactured at some point to glorify certain styles, lineages or individuals.

[r.(shaolin)]

Physical skills do not fall by the wayside when faced with a life threatening situation. Where do you get this idea? As ex military I can tell you that is not true.


I would agree that an expert would be much more capable, but what we are taking about, at least that's what I am talking about, is ‘getting there’ and developing skills and the role of ‘story’ in training, specifically training for deadly encounters.

You might want to check out, Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions, published by The MIT Press written by Gary Klein, a research psychologist who has done pioneering work in the field of ‘naturalistic decision making’ (NDM). Basically NDM is a study into how people make decisions in high-pressure, high-stakes environments. Klein says that, in the environments he studies, stories are told and retold because they contain wisdom. Stories are effective teaching tools. Note that some of the first funding into NDM research came from the U.S. Army and Navy. As I said earlier, its good stories, a bad story can get you killed, a good story can save your life or someone else's life.

Do people lose physical skill when under extreme stress? Yes they do, even experts do. That is well documented. (see article by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman and Bruce Siddle and in the Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace and Conflict published by Academic Press; October 10, 2008).

r.

[tc101]

I would agree that an expert would be much more capable, but what we are taking about, at least that's what I am talking about, is ‘getting there’ and developing skills and the role of ‘story’ in training, specifically training for deadly encounters.

You might want to check out, Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions, published by The MIT Press written by Gary Klein, a research psychologist who has done pioneering work in the field of ‘naturalistic decision making’ (NDM). Basically NDM is a study into how people make decisions in high-pressure, high-stakes environments. Klein says that, in the environments he studies, stories are told and retold because they contain wisdom. Stories are effective teaching tools. Note that some of the first funding into NDM research came from the U.S. Army and Navy. As I said earlier, its good stories, a bad story can get you killed, a good story can save your life or someone else's life.

Do people losing physical skill when under extreme stress? Yes they do, even experts do. That is well documented. (see article by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman and Bruce Siddle and in the Encyclopedia of Violence, Peace and Conflict published by Academic Press; October 10, 2008).

r.

I do not know where this idea of training that Chinese martial artists are training for deadly encounters comes from or about how you think stories and likely false or greatly embellished stories at that help you deal with them.

I have been making high pressure high stakes decisions my whole life since my only two occupations was military and law enforcement. Experience is shared and is useful but that doesn't give you skills. Skills come through practice.

Yes fine motor skills go under stress and even gross motor skills can can not will but can be effected by extreme stress but so what? I don't have any idea what your point is. If you have to fight you need skills. If you lose them then you lose. Some story isn't going to save your a$$.

[Faux Newbie]

Stories motivate action and inspire practice. Modern military training banks on this practice. It holds a higher place for the rank and file than training, and it is the basis for esprit de corps. That said, in a fight, it does not replace training, but at the front end, it inspires many to train hard. And much of it, in the military as in kung fu, is not valid history.

[r.(shaolin)]

Stories motivate action and inspire practice. Modern military training banks on this practice. It holds a higher place for the rank and file than training, and it is the basis for esprit de corps. That said, in a fight, it does not replace training, ... .

Agreed. I'm not advocating that physical training is not important or needed, it is. However, mental practice also has powerful potential in developing skills, what stories do is emotionally connect information to the individual, and can improve and develop skills, and to physiologically enable (see) the ability to kill (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/suicide-bomber-killed-in-iraq-part-of-wider-jihadi-base-in-calgary-1.2663890).
In addition when it comes to combat, as well as in self-defence, rapid 'situational awareness', 'sense making', and 'decision making' can be, and often are, negatively effected when one is in a high-pressure, high-stakes environment. These are important skills for both combat and self-defence and can spell success or failure in any action taken or not taken. 'Effective stories,' have been shown to be very helpful in making these combat and self-defence skills operative in high-pressure environments.

r.

[Rover]

There is two types of m.a. stories : the ones about creation of the systems,and the ones about famous practicioners of the systems.
I belive that creation ones are always overstated fairy tales made up for pumping the of a system up.Famuos practicioners about ones are more reliable and not so old as stories of m.a. system creations.

[SPJ]

History is used as a reference.

That is what it is or was.

:)

[Pipefighter]

Remember this history as you train and you can correct yourself.


I wonder if that is a good outlook for training method. Sometimes i spar and think i am using good posture, then find out i am not protecting my head as well as i thought. Is it possible to use the historical record for a legitimate self evaluation?

I personally enjoy hearing where a move that i am learning came from, how it was developed, by who if that story is known. If i show someone else that move i will tell them the story, including how i learned it.
But in social context i don't like to talk with other westerners about TCMA history, what very little i know, because virtually every discussion becomes a comparison of who knows more and who heard the "true version" of that history, and suddenly you have two white boys with quiet feelings of contention over issues that neither really know, and shouldn't have a personal stake in.

If learning TCMA history is important to pass on, maybe it should come with a disclaimer??

[Pipefighter]

Stories motivate action and inspire practice. Modern military training banks on this practice. It holds a higher place for the rank and file than training, and it is the basis for esprit de corps. That said, in a fight, it does not replace training, but at the front end, it inspires many to train hard. And much of it, in the military as in kung fu, is not valid history.

Absolutely true. but is that a good thing?
Allegedly, the Romans were a small farming community who created their own mythological history of being the descendants of the might Romulus. Gradually they started taking over more land because they felt it was their destiny.
The USA had a destiny to manifest at one point too, and so did the Germans, etc...
I believed the Pilgrims were our forefathers until i got to college :eek:
Does holding a mythology/"history" near and dear benefit training or society? I wonder which happens more- a legitimate technique is passed on because of an ancient history, or a concept is lost because the ancient history fills the place where a gentle jab to the nose would have been a more valid lesson?

[Faux Newbie]

Absolutely true. but is that a good thing?
Allegedly, the Romans were a small farming community who created their own mythological history of being the descendants of the might Romulus. Gradually they started taking over more land because they felt it was their destiny.
The USA had a destiny to manifest at one point too, and so did the Germans, etc...
I believed the Pilgrims were our forefathers until i got to college :eek:
Does holding a mythology/"history" near and dear benefit training or society? I wonder which happens more- a legitimate technique is passed on because of an ancient history, or a concept is lost because the ancient history fills the place where a gentle jab to the nose would have been a more valid lesson?

Great post.

In response, I think it depends. If the story inspires action that is informed by reality, it could be good. If it inspires action just to inspire that action, it can make us into the tool of others. The truth value of the story does not necessarily determine which of those responses it inspires.

[Pipefighter]

That's a good point.
I wonder if it's important for each style to include the common ancient history/story as that style is passed down, or if the history study should be left to scholars? Serious querry...

[sanjuro_ronin]

Those that do not learn from history, are bound to repeat it.
I think that passing down the history of a MA is crucial for the practitioners to get a TOTAL understanding of the art.
I think it makes a difference to the student when he learns that his art was founded and developed by fighters as opposed to being developed for other reasons.
I think it matters to understand if a system has a military background or a civilian background as that can help one understand certain principles and tools in the system.
Students just need to be told HONESTLY what a systems history is, which parts are true and which are not and which are just color and flavor for storytelling.

[Faux Newbie]

That's a good point.
I wonder if it's important for each style to include the common ancient history/story as that style is passed down, or if the history study should be left to scholars? Serious querry...

I definitely agree actual history is best done by historians. However, folk stories are another thing. Everyone has them. Modern people who think otherwise tend to forget that Paul Revere never finished his ride, just as the Romans were not descended from Wolf orphans.