Mastery of Mind, Body and Spirit

[DelicateSound]

I think there is more to MA's than just the physical side.

By overcoming trials you learn to better yourself. A diamond can't be polished without friction, nor man perfected without trials.

I find relaxation ,health, peace and a better sense of life thru my Kung-Fu and hope that others can feel the same way too. Maybe its just me, but I hope not.

[joedoe]

I think morality/ethics should be taught alongside martial arts. Whether it is a side-effect of MA training is debatable.

[No_Know]

"Aikido is not Bando, Pa Kua is not TKD, Shorin-Ryu Karate is not Shuai Chaio, Tai Chi Ch'uan is not Western Military Combatives and so on and so on. "

Both Aikido and Bando look to resolve the situation decisively.

Pa Kua and TKD study and have a basis in directness.

Shuia Chiao isn't mixed with any other Martial art to make it better.

T'ai Chi Ch'uan and Western Military Combatives quickly dispatches the objective(opponent).

And so on.

[Black Jack]

All arts may have come from the background of self preservation but just because that is a common goal does not make the path or the approach in that goal the same.

Aikido has a much different outlook than the tribal arts of Burmese Bando.

They have much different psychological takes on combatives and much different physical attribute training, they both gear themselves towards different tactics in getting the job done, according to what they percieve as getting the job done, which in the end equates them to not being the same art.

Pa Kua and TKD are like night in day in training parameters and in functional operations, they are geared towards different ranges, methods and historical backgrounds, again making them much different arts.

Tai Chi Ch'aun and Western Military Combatives may both have the goal of taking out the attacker as soon as possible but so does every other art so that point is kinda mute, the real point is that their training guidlines, delivery systems and mental outlooks are again different, thus again making them different arts.

As for the Shuai Chaio comment, what makes you think that Shuai Chaio is a static system that has not evolved and adapted other techniques, principles, and training tools into its forumla over its many years of growth to make it a better system?????????????

The reason that it may be around so long and considered by the CMA crowd to be so good is because of its ability to grow.

Whatever the case of your point, I stand fast that all arts are not the same arts, each has its own encyclopedia of history which in turm shapes the base format for its students and their evolution towards combat both in mental and physical principles.

That is like saying that at the end a TKD master will be able to do the same things a BJJ master would.

[Shooter]

>"Tai Chi Ch'aun and Western Military Combatives may both have the goal of taking out the attacker as soon as possible but so does every other art so that point is kinda mute, the real point is that their training guidlines, delivery systems and mental outlooks are again different, thus again making them different arts"<

Could you please outline and describe what you believe to be the differences between TCC's and WMC's "training guidlelines, delivery systems and mental outlooks"?

Just trying to give you the benefit of the doubt.

[Black Jack]

Why do I need somebody to give me the benefit of the doubt?

My point is not to discuss the particular merits of one art over another or to make blanket statements on what one system does or does not do.

People will always have different personal preferences and judgements on what they believe the martial arts should stand for or be, what arts are better, what methods are more realistic, what training is better geared for combat, and so and so on.

I refuse to accept the theory that all martial arts are the same, to me it is a ridiculous judgement, but that is just my take on the matter.

Since you want to get specific and to use Taijiquan as an example onto its self lets take a quick look.

What Tai Chi system are we speaking about here since I am not a CMA scholar? Chen, Wu, Sun, Yang, Chao, are all they the extact same system, according to the above philiosphy they must all be, no differences, the same flavor.

What Western Military Combatives system are we in reference to? WWI, WWII, Modern, O'Neill, Biddle, Styer, Brown, Fairbairn, Applegate, Nelson, American Combato, Jim Grover, Beckwith, Combat Sambo Spetsnaz, John Kary, Systema, Mangel, Krav Maga, RAT JKD, LINE, SAFTA........

The biggest difference between Tai Chi and Military based combative approachs is in the belief of "Chi" for one.

Other general training CMA principles like Ying & Yang and its never ending cycle of energy between the two is also absent, power generation methods are gathered in different ways, the classical training methods are way different, Tai Chi has forms, postures, spiritual and mental meditations, Tui Sau, San Shou (good schools) and specific Tai Chi footwork elements, you do not see the Tai Chi 13 basics like Peng, Lu, Ji, An, Cai, Li, Zhou, Gou and others being ingrained into a student of military combatives and I am sure that each family trains those above elements in a different fashion from each other to some degree as well.

Western Military Combatives based on what we are talking about have a much more basic approach to their training, which is to transfer a mixed bag of totally serious skills to different soliders of different physical makeups in a compact and realistic period of time, soliders who not only have different physical makeups and natural attributes, fat, thin, tall, short, but also different mindsets on what they need to accomplish in a h2h encounter.

WWII combatives have no forms, no postures, no meditations, no push hands, no specific offensive/defensive footwork sets, no rituals, no chi blasts, nothing extraneous, no "if he does that, you do this" training, no programs for spiritual development, they do not take a strict duelists sceniro approach to fighting, they incorporate a lot of situational sparring and resistance training, the fighter is given a small core of techs and principles to respond with and those techs and principles are based on pure aggressiveness combined with a focus on "Hicks Law" which shows that decision time is proportional to the number of alternatives.


Here is the main point though, both of those systems "can" be exceedingly effective, both "can" make task oriented and formable fighters, it is all up to what works for you and what you want to do, what your needs are, and what you find as extraneous, and what as worthy of study.

Do fighting systems share some of the same ideas and tactics, of course, the good ones do, but does that make them the same art, no.

[Starchaser107]

many respects, you seem to have an understanding of what the different arts entail , and based on your posts you seem as well to be a no nonsense person in your approach to your martial discipline. This is good, but I dont think you are looking at what the statement really means. All martial arts might not be the same in terms of philosophy and application, movement etc. but these things are all on the surface level. I believe that the original statement made here said something about all arts when at the highest level or something to that effect. I can see why an arguement like this could sound like alot of bs but if you can just for a moment look beyond the face value and superfiscial definitions and terms ascribed to the various arts.
All martial arts will eventually take you to the same place, ultimately the goal is self preservation by means of eliminating an immediate or impending threat. They are all gates to the same place no matter how much they are decorated. Regardless of what you have in your hands or not or how you use your empty hands. How this proves itself is that in reality there is no ultimate martial art. No martial art is better than the next, because it Always depends on the practicioner and how well they implement thier knowledge.
Surely a skilled gunfighter would seemingly have the advantage against an open handed stylist, but there are numerous odds that say what if so and so..like what if the gun jams or what if the gunfighter has no time to draw the gun, what if he missess , and so on.
Because there is no ULTIMATE martial art. Does it mean then that all arts are at some point Equal...? That is up to you here to decide. If there is no lesser or inferior art to another , because there is none Superior to another then why are we scared to say what is inbetween. Why does this frighten us?

[Black Jack]

I agree with a lot of what you are stating.

I do not believe their are better arts, but better arts for different people, some people have different attributes, responses, and processes to what they can accomplish, some arts fit other people better.

The old do not put a square block into a round hole viewpoint.

Though their is a middle ground in my "their are no better arts, but better arts for different people" statement, their is just some stuff that is bizzare and freakin akin to commiting hari-kari in regards to self-preservation.

I agree 100% that all arts have the goal of self-protection in mind but to steal from a common JKD saying is that there are a lot of schools that train their students in self-prefection and not self preservation.

Be this the fault of the style, no, be this the fault of the teacher, yes.

Either way I see it, even with the common goal of self-defense/protection/preservation, the way a system handles that situation is often very different from one another, each has advantages and specific attributes that go hand in hand with how that style trains someone to fight.

When you add onto that mix the fact that each person has their own specifc advantages and specifc attributes that go hand in hand with how they like to fight then you have gone beyond the basic generic style formula and into the personal evolution stage.

Add in crosstraining and then you no longer have this one system theory, anymore, anyway.

A theory which is kinda dissed by even the aspect of crosstraining.

[Ryu]

Mr. Nunchaku, sorry for the delay.
I have some time right now so I'll post. (Then I will train )

Well first, regardless of whether or not Martial Art SHOULD encompass morality and ethics, it is quite obvious that there are some "martial artists" of questionable ethics and morals.
So regardless of whether or not MA teaches it, some people do not become "good people" because of its study.

That being said, I do feel that ethical logic and study should in fact be a part of the martial arts. And that is not necessarily to say that one must "follow" a set dogma of rules because someone says so, but to the contrary, I think one should delve into the realm of ethical theory and moral philosophy because it gives the student a very well gripping mind on some of life's most difficult issues. The physical aspects of martial arts are used to fight. This is the only thing the physical techniques know. How to cripple, break, tear, cut, hit, etc.
Now, even though this is the case, the mentality behind why those tools are used can exist on many different planes for people. There is a Buddhist example of a "knife". The knife itself is not moral nor immoral. Depending on the motivation, the knife can actually take on a persona. In the hands of a killer, the knife has a very dark and sinister persona, in the hands of a surgeon, the knife takes on a very protective and life-saving quality.
Mentality and motivation behind things play a LARGE part on why things are truly "wrong or right".

There is nothing wrong with seeing the martial arts as simply fighting techniques, or the ability to compete, have fun, etc.
On the physical level, that is EXACTLY what they are. When you research your own motivation and mentality, things can become a little more deep. That's all. Those skills can become tools to kill your own ego, your own demons. The spiritual aspects connected to MA can be used to better your own confidence, life condition, etc. But then again, most religion does this anyway if practiced proactively.

As everyone on this board knows, I have a very strong sense of right and wrong, and justice. My martial art training has expressed that my entire life. I went through all the "levels" so to speak (well except the "mastery" one LOL) But I began in the martial arts as a way of fighting what was wrong. It was a spiritual thing to me. I started when I was young in things like Karate, Tae Kwon Do, etc. When I reached my teenage years, I got into fights and wanted my martial art just geared towards effective fighting. I studied JKD, Brazilian Jiu-jitsu, and judo. I stayed with these all my teenage years, up into my 20's, until just now (I still practice judo, BJJ, etc) But for me something was still lacking. I was very much into the tough guy image of MA, I wanted to look like, and train with Cage Fighters, etc. And I did.
But I still wasn't happy with myself. I was still obsessed with being tough, kicking ass, etc. When I had the realization that there's always going to be someone who can beat me up, I quit worrying about it as much. I still had my strong feelings of "good and bad, innocent and criminal" what was "fair and unfair".
The things that angered me the most (and still do) are when innocent people are made to feel afraid, helpless, etc. The reality of a "good" man who studies martial arts being destroyed by a "bad" man who is bigger, stronger, etc never sat well with me. And it doesn't matter the martial art you study, because there may always be someone who studies it too who is still better than you and "thuggish, criminal, etc."
I started looking for different ways of "winning" so to speak. That brought me into different catagories like weapons, OC spray, guns, etc. But even that doesn't make you "tough"
So I once again have come back to my starting point. I want a martial art that I can express my emotions in as well as giving me realistic fighting skills. My judo and BJJ has given me that already, and I know now what it takes to fight. Therefore I will not fall into ignorance about what will and won't work for real life.

Right now I am going to give Ninjutsu/ninpo a try. The people in Hatsumi's organization seem to stress a moral/spiritual aspect to their art that I am really attracted to right now.
Again it goes back to that mentality behind the art or tool. "Fighting dirty" can be very "fair" in the big scheme of things if you understand the "why" of what you're doing.

Take care,
Ryu

[Mr Nunchaku]

Again, I'd like to thank everyone who posted. Great reading indeed.

[No_Know]

"As for the Shuai Chaio comment, what makes you think that Shuai Chaio is a static system that has not evolved and adapted other techniques, principles, and training tools into its forumla over its many years of growth to make it a better system????????????? "


What you mention didn't happen except in Your mind.

Shuai Chiao is. What matters is how all that went into it came together to be Shuai Chiao--what you see now. Try to keep straight when you are talking about. It, as it is, could change, yet not be different. Not anything that is not Shuai Chiao will be added to it.

Shuai Chiao was not the original name because at what it started as it wasn't what you see today, but when the original was not the original, it got a different name. Shuai Chiao won't be added to. It Can grow from its self. But add to it, and you have a New/different martial art with old roots.~

[Black Jack]

Could you sound more f-u-c-k-i-n-g retarded.

Do you guys go to some sort of Master Po martial art college to sound like that.

Class 101: "How not to address anything with a straight answer".

Were you and Tuyrien roommates?