Kata, martial arts and miscellanea

[Shavru]

No Enlightenment there. Just a really good laugh. 1st. Mixed Martial ARTS. do you understand that some of these MMA fighters hold black belts in Multiple arts? None of them are pure boxers as you pointed towards being the "more effective" in your last post. If your assertion was true. Then MAYWEATHER JR. and ANDRE WARD ect would be the top MMA fighters too. You don't see boxers only even succeeding in MMA. They get themselves kicked silly...literally.

So then you post links of MMA fighters fighting people who have some skill in 1 or another martial art. As far as the first one, I have to suggest he might have trained in the style that appeals to you. Learn the bare minimum and never learned how to actually understand any depth to his training. This is a perfect example of training for a belt and not to learn the art. As for the second guy, as has been pointed out in this thread. Should someone grapple with me like the MMA artist did, he would have a punctured liver from the knife sticking out of his back. Closing like that is only appropriate when you are fighting with rules and know the opponent isn't going to stab you. Sooooooo. Seems you have contradicted yourself AGAIN!

 

[davidf99]

Can someone explain the "spiritual component" of martial arts? My uncle has volunteered to pay for martial arts as long as the have some sort of "spirituality" with them. So boxing, krav maga, and any sort of "combat" martial art is out, because they're "to violent", along with a complete absence of "spirituality" "self discovery" and a ton of other crap. I was wondering if there was any sort of practical, real world basis for this?

The spiritual component of martial arts can't be explained in a few words in an internet forum, and especially to someone who has contempt for the very idea and who just wants to learn how to fight more effectively. I suggest you start your martial arts journey by showing a little more respect for your uncle -- "the guy who's willing to pay for my classes." He appears to understand what you really need better than you do.

You might have noticed that this subforum is mainly about knives, khukuris in particular. Although we have threads about martial arts occasionally, and there are some people here who know various martial arts, that's not the main focus. Now if you want to learn how to fight with a khukuri, or how the Gurkha do it, there are people here who can point you to sources of information. Of course if you actually do that in the real civilian world you will most likely end up in jail -- or shot by someone.

 

[sams]

If one can find a true master to teach you, Tai Chi is a spiritual martial art. Starting with the 108 posture form. It will take 15 to 20 years to get good enough to "fight". I prefer to call it dancing. They call it Tae-So, push hands, Da-Lu shoulder pushing, And the San-so, two person form. Then there is single / two person sword form, then bo form (staff). All wrapped up in internal development of chi.

 

[Gehazi]

is a master really necessary when there are books and you can read though? can we not teach ourselves almost anything and through practice become better? or is a teacher necessary to guide that practice? thoughts?-- because I love to read but I hate people tell me I am doing right!

 

[cul4u01]

is a master really necessary when there are books and you can read though? can we not teach ourselves almost anything and through practice become better? or is a teacher necessary to guide that practice? thoughts?-- because I love to read but I hate people tell me I am doing right!

Personally, I can't see how anyone can learn without a Master, Sensei, or Teacher, but then, I've never attempted to learn from a book, video, or DVD either. I am guessing that one could probably learn some things from such materials, but honestly, they may lose something in the translation, without a senior to actually explain, and show techniques, theories, and philosophies.

Really good question, not really sure of an adequate answer, sorry.

 

[Shavru]

Gehazi, as with everything there are choices that are right for the goals. For a person who expects to learn the techniques of a specific fighting movement then no, you are quite right. A Master is not necessary to that at all. Now, I will use golf as an example. There are thousands of golf books out there. You can read one and go play golf. You will probably shoot in the high 100s or 110s if you are reasonably athletic and have happened to pick a book that fits your body type. You can then read another book, that will totally contradict the first and go shoot again in the high 100s or 110s. If you enjoy playing, then you have succeeded in teaching yourself to golf via a book. However, if you continue to practice you will eventually get that score down because you will start adjusting for the fact your ball always slices to the right by aiming further left. Pretty soon you will shoot in the 90s. Then you go to an instructor and they look at your swing and attempt to keep a straight face as they go about changing everything your body has done to change the swing to account for your lack of understanding of what pronation feels like. Now that you know what it feels like because someone showed you physically where your hands should be crossing each other you practice that and get to shoot in the high 80s. So you go back another time to the instructor and they watch your swing and tell you, that you also sway backwards at the wrong time. And gently moves you through the right motion by holding your head in place so you don't rear backwards when you "shift your weight to load up your right foot on the backswing" exactly as you read in your book but misunderstood. Now you shoot in the 70s and are having much more fun because now you can enter the club tournament and have a good chance of winning. But yes, you can learn golf from a book if you just want to take a walk following a white ball. If you want to win then there is no replacing of human to human face to face instruction in a fight. I ALWAYS want to win.

 

[Gehazi]

but who did they learn from? who did the first man learn from? I think there is something to be said for teaching yourself regardless of the discipline-- as all the revelations that can be taught you can learn by paying attention to what is going on, just like the first people to puzzle out those things did; they practiced until they realized how things work.

I am not saying you can practice by reading, but it is like with anything, I think instruction makes it faster and easier, but teaching yourself you can come upon genuine and new ideas because you are devoid of the prejudices that come with a long tradition. on that point you generally learn better and quicker with instruction because it is a tradition older than the current teacher, well practiced over generations, and well realized, but , as I said before the only part of martial arts that make sense to me as a gun enthusiast( as there is no self defense need for fists when I can shoot someone ) are the traditional and spiritual aspects, beyond just the physicality. like I have owned the book of 5 rings since I was 14 and still read it to remind myself of the wisdom. (some things transcend the discipline into effective use for living) golf does not have the same merit in my eyes , even though I am sure many people find it meditative and spiritual in many ways.

and taking a walk following a white ball sounds pretty relaxing

 

[cul4u01]

but who did they learn from? who did the first man learn from? I think there is something to be said for teaching yourself regardless of the discipline-- as all the revelations that can be taught you can learn by paying attention to what is going on, just like the first people to puzzle out those things did; they practiced until they realized how things work.

I am not saying you can practice by reading, but it is like with anything, I think instruction makes it faster and easier, but teaching yourself you can come upon genuine and new ideas because you are devoid of the prejudices that come with a long tradition. on that point you generally learn better and quicker with instruction because it is a tradition older than the current teacher, well practiced over generations, and well realized, but , as I said before the only part of martial arts that make sense to me as a gun enthusiast( as there is no self defense need for fists when I can shoot someone ) are the traditional and spiritual aspects, beyond just the physicality. golf does not have the same merit in my eyes , even though I am sure many people find it meditative and spiritual in many ways.

I cannot speak for other Martial Arts, but in Kung Fu, many styles, and theories, were based from observations of animals, and the attributes of nature, (trees, water, sand, etc...). These philosophies were pondered upon for a long time, before any physical techniques were even extrapolated from the theoretical understandings, and put into meaningful, practical applications. Over time (500 generations), as the learnings are passed from Master to students, new ideas would emerge, and/or, in rare instances, a special student would be so talented, he would learn many styles, and incorporate the best of his learned styles, into a brand new style, and thus, the cycle would begin anew.

Again, many Martial Artists now, practice for the health benefits, and application of skills can be directly related to excellence in many other aspects of ones life. For instance, reflexes trained to react, almost as fast as the brain decides what to do is great for active sports. ie. football, baseball, basketball, soccer. The brain itself is taught to recognize, analyze, and make a decisive decision quickly. Coordination, relaxation, and concentration, makes gun usage markedly more efficient.

 

[sams]

You learn faster from a good master and less mistakes are made along the journey. Many techniques are hidden and take many years to figure out without a master to guide you.

 

[Shavru]

Hehe, Gehazi, You can learn that some mushrooms are not toxic all by yourself correct? Martial Arts are as Cul points out strengthened by being consolidations of many, many people's experiences over vast amounts of time. Some things you don't want to learn for yourself like what it feels like to eat mushrooms that are actually toadstools How did the first person learn that some mushrooms are poisonous? Painfully! But that person added to the collective wisdom of the rest of the "clan" that the mushrooms with dots are to be avoided. As Cul mentions, Guns are another tool that humans use. Practice with one will make you much better than not practicing. Someone that can learn to draw a gun from their holster can shoot another person, however, how far away are you from this threat? In most cases of defensive shooting you are in contact to near contact range. In the time it takes you to draw a gun, what have I done? stood there and waited? Or have I taken control of the fight and kept you from bringing your gun up into line to shoot me? Interesting concept, If we are 21 yards away and you identify my as a bad guy, can you shoot me and honestly claim I was a threat in the court afterwards? If we are 5 yards away can you draw your gun from where it is concealed before I can hit you with my cane? Hmm, I choose to be ready so whichever is the situation I have the best chance of a favorable outcome. Which is why I train in Martial Arts AND carry.

 

[Gehazi]

well like I said, a gun makes all martial arts moot "for the purpose of winning combat" because he with the gun always wins , and guns do not care about training and a 5 year old can kill a 1000 generation grand master of all disciplines of martial arts, if the 5 year old uses a gun.

I do not say it to devalue the practice of it, as cul pointed out the numerous health benefits, coordination, etc it improves on all counts, and the traditions are valid-- they just are not valid in contests of violence any longer, because of technology, otherwise we would send soldiers to fight with kungfu/ MMA and not artillery and guns

on the point of mushroom identification, that is something you can easily learn through books < as the point was not the denial of other peoples knowledge, just the lack of a need for a teacher-- scientists routinely lay out the facts of identifying various species ( thankfully) and yeah I can pretty much identify mushrooms safely -- though the best advice I ever got from a book was " look at them, you don't need to eat them" because so many species look the same and wild species can be infected with bactieria; so to be clear I am not saying deny traditions and the learning of generations-- just that with the power of books and words you can transfer knowledge with some proficiency, enough that a person can learn electronic engineering, organic chemistry , arms manufacture etc all through books alone, without any need for a teacher.

the value in martial arts in a teacher is another level really, but I don't think it devalues what people can do on their own, using only the writings of masters, and not any direct teaching. because if written words did not reliably transfer knowledge, they would hardly be so well used or accomplished in the task.

I will grant you there could be exceptions to the rule, certainly a person like you could get the drop on a person like me and probably easily win, but I am talking about the base effectiveness of untrained person with gun vs trained person without; even with the value investment in the training, the gun overbalances that equation.(even then my main point is that a person can learn tons by books, because lots of books have been written by true masters of almost every art, and those books have great value because you can learn from them-- book of 5 rings being a very good example, art of war another

 

[Shavru]

Gehazi, I do not do this lightly as it is something I don't care to discuss often. But I have taken a gun away from someone that wished to use it against me in anger when I did not have one. I am here to still type. They are no longer available to do so. Guns are not magic wands that make the user impossible to kill and the belief they are is very dangerous to your existence. Please do not continue in your believe that a person with a gun, even one that is familiar with them is "immune" to a person without one. It can make life shorter than it should be.

 

[Gehazi]

and my point stands that you can mass your armies of kung fu masters/ sword masters etc and give me my untrained peasants with rifles, and we will see history repeat itself ( that is why the gun causes the rise of representative governments professional warrior classes lost power of violence as it no longer required skill on the same level as the hand to hand martial arts; definitely not the physical condition. the hand out performing the gun is the exception not the rule-- again I am not saying there is no value in martial arts, i was just pointing out why I think the main value of martial arts is spiritual and psychological.

and I am very very glad you outclassed the fool who raised arms to you, as I and all of us here would be poorer for it

 

[Shavru]

Ok, so in our discussion we have now moved on to warfare of the type with massed armies? I thought the discussion was self-defense but still I can defend my corner as it were. I would say that the Gurkahs give us a perfect example of needing to defend yourself against armed attackers when your gun jams, you run out of bullets ect. Even using the tripod mount of your gun as the most recent heroic one did. As for peasants with rifles. If I am able to arm my Masters with rifles as well, then the balance swings to my advantage again as has been proven historically. Once again, nothing wrong with better tools, but because those tools are available to everyone, the better trained person will win using the same tools every time.

 

[J W Bensinger]

I think most o the real old timers-the founders of (whichever) art-learned from the battlefield-from success and from observing failure (and experiencing it, as long as it wasn't terminal). One of the most important aspects of any form of personal combat is force-on-force-sparring, sim round training, etc. Without testing yourself against a non-compliant partner, it kinda reduces whichever art is in question to slightly more dignified LARPing. This is also where a teacher can be invaluable-he or she has had 20 or 30 years of mistakes to learn from, which can save te student quite a bit of wear & tear.
Guns are very powerful instruments, but an untrained person with a firearm against a committed attacker who knows how to do damage had better be pretty far away when it kicks off...an most nonsense happens at arms length, for civilians.

 

[J W Bensinger]

I have come to the conclusion that animal based stances used in kung fu and like martial arts are less effective than the basic boxers or pugilists stance based off my observations of things like professional fighting, modern martial arts and USMC training manuals/demonstrations. If they were more effective than the basic fighting stance, wouldn't they be used by people who's lives (or paychecks) depend on fighting?

The arts used by the modern military are a)picked based partially on being able to teach large numbers of folks (who may or may not be motivated to learn) quickly, and b) not always the best choice. Grappling, for instance (which features heavily in both USMC and Army unarmed training these days) is an essential tool in any fighters kit, but a very poor choice in a situation where your opponent's cousin may come over and bash your head in with a Kalashnikov butt. This stuff isn't always chosen by the people who use it (witness the M9, and the ACU uniform).
A lot of the long stance training in traditional arts is based on the fact that when you actually fight, you pull your limbs in and your stances get shorter-at least if you train long stances, when this happens you won't be quite as gaggled up. The other thing to remember is that stances aren't ways to stand there for 30 seconds-they're ways to apply force, and change constantly.

 

[Gehazi]

really informative posts

 

[Howard Wallace]

Can someone explain the "spiritual component" of martial arts? My uncle has volunteered to pay for martial arts as long as the have some sort of "spirituality" with them. So boxing, krav maga, and any sort of "combat" martial art is out, because they're "to violent", along with a complete absence of "spirituality" "self discovery" and a ton of other crap. I was wondering if there was any sort of practical, real world basis for this?

I lean more and more towards the perspective that there is no person, no situation, and no art on this earth that is not fundamentally spiritual. It seems a characteristic of this realm.


The most practical, down to earth, battle hardened combat veteran may have incredible spiritual insights to convey, as may the checker in the supermarket. It's not only with the ostentatiously spiritual that insights are found.


Nonetheless it seems your uncle is trying to steer you towards some insights he thinks might be valuable for you. Might be worth talking to him a bit more about what those are.


Various martial arts have various practices the touch upon the state of mind. These are often denoted as spiritual. Some may be admirable, some not so much. For instance, I personally don't much care for a training of unquestioning deference to religious or political authorities. On the other hand, disciplines that help the user effectively use his mind and body can be very beneficial. Meditation and other "spiritual" practices may teach the student to effectively use the adrenaline state rather than being paralyzed by it. In a similar manner rational thought can either be an advantage or hindrance in an emergency situation. Learning to effectively use thought and when not to use it is a crucial aspect of many martial arts.


Practical efficiencies are often to be gained through the contemplation of supposedly mystical concepts like: chi or ki, not doing, flow, dao-do-path, compassion, etc.

 

[Howard Wallace]

is a master really necessary when there are books and you can read though? can we not teach ourselves almost anything and through practice become better? or is a teacher necessary to guide that practice? thoughts?-- because I love to read but I hate people tell me I am doing right!

You have received some great responses from some very knowledgeable people. While I have no claims to mastery I can provide perspective from someone with a contrasting learning style.

Books and videos can have great value. It does take a particular type of person to learn from them. Learning is always an internal process and if the books or videos can inspire productive exploration they can be of value.

I can provide a couple of examples that illustrate the internal nature of learning in my experience.

I have studied Bowie knife techniques with a very competent teacher. This in both the classroom setting and in one-on-one instruction.there were some techniques I still had great difficulty with after instruction. Upon obtaining a video of my instructor performing these techniques I examined them frame by frame. Some of the action was so swift that there was a significant difference in positions between two adjacent frames of the video. I studied two frames for a long time figure out all the possible variations from getting between one point and the other. Eventually I understood the spirit of the movement. Sometimes the hand would pull or push the knife, sometimes the knife would pull or push the hand. After I had that insight from studying the video, many of the things my instructor had been telling me became clear.

Another example of this internal aspect of learning came from my experiences learning the short staff from my Aikido instructor. After I had plateaued in my development for some time I tried a different approach. I set down in the center of a big field of grass all by myself. I plucked a stem of grass and broke off a 3 inch section. Holding it carefully between my thumb and index finger I spent a couple of hours working through the motions of the shortstaff with this tiny piece of grass. When I next return to the dojo and picked up a jo the sensei looked at me with amazement. He asked me what had happened. Although this particular experience wasn't triggered by a book or by a video, it is the kind of internal experience that can be facilitated by a book or video.

Recording technologies are what separate us from the beasts and make civilization possible. They confer the great advantages of enabling us to learn from teachers that are separated from us in either space or time. It is a great gift.

 

[J W Bensinger]

You have received some great responses from some very knowledgeable people. While I have no claims to mastery I can provide perspective from someone with a contrasting learning style.

Books and videos can have great value. It does take a particular type of person to learn from them. Learning is always an internal process and if the books or videos can inspire productive exploration they can be of value.

I can provide a couple of examples that illustrate the internal nature of learning in my experience.

I have studied Bowie knife techniques with a very competent teacher. This in both the classroom setting and in one-on-one instruction.there were some techniques I still had great difficulty with after instruction. Upon obtaining a video of my instructor performing these techniques I examined them frame by frame. Some of the action was so swift that there was a significant difference in positions between two adjacent frames of the video. I studied two frames for a long time figure out all the possible variations from getting between one point and the other. Eventually I understood the spirit of the movement. Sometimes the hand would pull or push the knife, sometimes the knife would pull or push the hand. After I had that insight from studying the video, many of the things my instructor had been telling me became clear.

Another example of this internal aspect of learning came from my experiences learning the short staff from my Aikido instructor. After I had plateaued in my development for some time I tried a different approach. I set down in the center of a big field of grass all by myself. I plucked a stem of grass and broke off a 3 inch section. Holding it carefully between my thumb and index finger I spent a couple of hours working through the motions of the shortstaff with this tiny piece of grass. When I next return to the dojo and picked up a jo the sensei looked at me with amazement. He asked me what had happened. Although this particular experience wasn't triggered by a book or by a video, it is the kind of internal experience that can be facilitated by a book or video.

Recording technologies are what separate us from the beasts and make civilization possible. They confer the great advantages of enabling us to learn from teachers that are separated from us in either space or time. It is a great gift.

This is where books and videos shine-when combined with realtime instruction they become a shorthand for both memory and the parsing of technique that is not fully understood.
Most of the European sword treatises and the Yagyu and Katori-ryu written materials are a memory aid for the student, not a teacing method.
Very well said, Howard. I was thinking about this but couldn't really explain what I was thinking.