If we took away the philosophical or spiritual roots of a combat art... Wouldn't it actually end up being BETTER?

[Gerry Seymour]

A better tool to destroy enemies. That's putting it mildly. In a sports sense, it's more about which combat system will give you the most wins in sanctioned competitions. Perhaps it is a relic of the past, but back in the days, just like how lifters and bodybuilders preached about their super amazing training systems, martial artists who competed in combat sports represented their schools. American Top Team, Miletich Camp, Shoot fighting, Gracie Jiu Jitsu, you name it. At the end of the day, nobody cares what religion your combat system follows. It's just another sport, and the only thing that matters is the last man standing. The winner.

Martial arts are exactly that. Martial. That's all they are. If someone wanted to pursue spirituality, there are better avenues for that.

You're arguing that MA should be what you prefer them to be. That's not my preference, though, so why should they be that way?

 

[Gerry Seymour]

I think you have a misunderstanding on the role of religion and martial arts. The vast majority of them don't have anything religious as part of their foundation and it was cultural stuff added later.

For example, in 1908 Itosu wrote, "Karate did not develop from Buddhism or Confucianism. In the past the Shorin-ryu school and the Shorei-ryu school were brought to Okinawa from China . Both of these schools have strong points and I therefore list them below just as they are without embellishment."

Aikido WAS started and founded as a religious martial art. This art is probably the exception and not the norm in regards to the role of religion and martial arts.

To use your example, the winner of the 100-man prison rumble. What kind of guy was he? Moving forward, when you put him back into society how should he act? THIS is why martial arts incorporated philosophy and sometimes religious teachings into their art. They didn't want thugs/bullies using their knowledge in the wrong manner. They wanted to instill and teach an ethical code on WHEN to use your skills.

Here is the big key though. The skills taught didn't change at all. They were the same, so your premise that martial arts would be "better" if there wasn't that religious component is flawed. Martial arts became less effective when the teachers/leaders of those martial art styles decided to change the focus from just combat/fighting into other ways like character development etc.

For clarification, Ueshiba, from what I know, did not start his teaching as a religious thing. He added the philosophical pressure after converting to Omoto. The base art was (and arguably still is) Daito-ryu, and reportedly wasn't all that philosophical in the early years.

 

[Gerry Seymour]

If you were an athletic coach who teaches wrestling, would you really care how those kids are? Maybe they're jerks, maybe they're kind. Who the hell cares?

A lot of athletic coaches do care. "Based on a true story" movies have been made about them over and over. I played on teams coached by a few, and was one myself. Oh, and we cared about winning (coached two unbeaten seasons), but attitude and character mattered. I'd bench my best player if necessary.

 

[Zombocalypse]

All true. Now, look at it through the cultural eyes of those arts.

What would happen if as the high school wrestling coach you were criminally responsible if one of your wrestlers got into a fight and hurt someone? If you risked criminal prosecution or losing everything in a civil lawsuit, do you think that you would change your vetting process on who you accepted as a student? Your viewpoint is VERY American and ignores the culture that those arts came from.

The teachers of those arts had a HUGE responsibility for their students and what they did.

Also, you have failed to show that martial arts are less effective if they teach morals/ethics than arts that don't teach them. Also, you have failed to show that all schools teach this as part of their curriculum in a particular art (we can all agree on Aikido as the exception) even if it was taught that way at one time.

"

Also, you have failed to show that martial arts are less effective if they teach morals/ethics than arts that don't teach them

"

MMA is more effective in the octagon or ring than traditional martial arts like Karate, Kung Fu, and Wing Chun. Karate has strong Japanese Buddhist roots, Kung Fu has Chinese Shaolin Buddhist roots, and Wing Chun is a spin-off of Kung Fu. I'm sure you're aware of the McDojo meme, and it is usually traditional martial arts that end up being seen as McDojos. There was a poster here who once said that BJJ is incredibly effective because it is an "honest" art that is willing to adapt. And you see, in order to adapt, you gotta leave your roots.

"

Also, you have failed to show that all schools teach this as part of their curriculum in a particular art (we can all agree on Aikido as the exception) even if it was taught that way at one time.

"

I tend to lump all Eastern combat arts as coming from the same thing. The dragon god of the Asians, who taught the Asian people (me included, since I'm Asian) the combat techniques meant to destroy the enemies of the world. Or at least the woowoo people think so.

You being a martial arts enthusiast I'm sure have heard of legendary Kung Fu warriors beating powerful opponents with their fists. Those are all ********. Absolute, complete, ********. They are legends. That is all they are. We can argue all day and night about the history of this, this, and that, but at the end of the day, all Eastern combat arts with a touch of mysticism all came from the same thing. Hindu, Buddhist, and Daoist philosophies. Don't deny it.

All I'm suggesting here is to disrespect those woowoo roots and use their techniques for what they were meant for. Destruction, defense, and domination. Cut off your traditions. I know I did and it was the best thing I've ever done for myself.

 

[Zombocalypse]

Oh, and we cared about winning (coached two unbeaten seasons), but attitude and character mattered.

Why?

Seriously, why?

 

[O'Malley]

All true. Now, look at it through the cultural eyes of those arts.

What would happen if as the high school wrestling coach you were criminally responsible if one of your wrestlers got into a fight and hurt someone? If you risked criminal prosecution or losing everything in a civil lawsuit, do you think that you would change your vetting process on who you accepted as a student? Your viewpoint is VERY American and ignores the culture that those arts came from.

The teachers of those arts had a HUGE responsibility for their students and what they did.

Also, you have failed to show that martial arts are less effective if they teach morals/ethics than arts that don't teach them. Also, you have failed to show that all schools teach this as part of their curriculum in a particular art (we can all agree on Aikido as the exception) even if it was taught that way at one time.

In roughly 10 years of aikido (four different dojos, different lineages) I've never been taught any of the founder's philosophy. And I strongly suspect that only a handful of teachers worldwide would be able to do so (mine were not, although they hold high ranks), because it's complex and obscure. What I suspect you may find (again, not in my experience) are teachers who preach hippy new age teachings derived from post-war marketing tactics and Western exoticism, but calling it a feature of the art is misleading IMO.

If you were an athletic coach who teaches wrestling, would you really care how those kids are? Maybe they're jerks, maybe they're kind. Who the hell cares? Distinct personalities will always surface. As a coach, the only question you should have is whether or not they are law-abiding and civil. You are a wrestling coach, not a moral teacher. You're there to teach these ambitious kids how to wrestle. Who the hell cares what they do with those skills you teach them? It's their life. Screw 'em.

If they behave, they don't get arrested/suspended/sent to the hospital after a scuffle (so they actually compete and you have not wasted your time); they do not disturb the mood of your class; they do not make shy newbies quit; they are more pleasant to be around; etc.

In short, upholding moral standards makes you deal with less BS.

 

[Zombocalypse]

You're arguing that MA should be what you prefer them to be. That's not my preference, though, so why should they be that way?

Because words are supposed to have meaning. The word "martial" has its roots in Latin. Something to do with the god of war, Mars, or something like that. Martial is ultimately about combat. Just because you add "art" to "martial" doesn't permit you to add prayers into your curriculum. Otherwise, just lead a cult. And become one of those weird McDojos that YouTube influencers always make fun of.

 

[Zombocalypse]

In roughly 10 years of aikido (four different dojos, different lineages) I've never been taught any of the founder's philosophy. And I strongly suspect that only a handful of teachers worldwide would be able to do so (mine were not, although they hold high ranks), because it's complex and obscure. What I suspect you may find (again, not in my experience) are teachers who preach hippy new age teachings derived from post-war marketing tactics and Western exoticism, but calling it a feature of the art is misleading IMO.



If they behave, they don't get arrested/suspended/sent to the hospital after a scuffle (so they actually compete and you have not wasted your time); they do not disturb the mood of your class; they do not make shy newbies quit; they are more pleasant to be around; etc.

In short, upholding moral standards makes you deal with less BS.

Yeah. Which is why I said, "law-abiding and civil". Are you seriously gonna reject a kid in your class just because the poor guy can't get along because of Asperger's? Bro, you gotta be clear with the rules. If you say, no racial slurs, you gotta mean no racial slurs. Don't be one of those idiots who establish rules and then makes exceptions on their star pupils. That's pathetic.

You gotta define what "behaving" means. Kids come from different backgrounds. Some like to cuss, some hate it. If you say some weird, vague, ******** rule like, "be kind to one another" and then kick out a student for "cussing" when he's been categorically kind to others and justify the expulsion by him not being kind, what the heck kind of hypocrite coach are you?

Would you listen to a genius scientist on how to lift weights? love no. Hell no. Even if he thinks he knows better than others. He doesn't lift and probably doesn't have friends. For that same reason, no one should give a flying damn about your opinions on what is good or bad behavior.

Are you trying to be a goody-two-shoes Nazi by teaching kids profound life teachings in a martial arts school? That's damn hilarious.

Ultimately, I love fighting, I love Olympic lifting, I love powerlifting, and I love video games. But my truest passion is philosophy. If people ask me some deep, philosophical question, I'd gladly answer it. It's me doing my job. At the same time, I wouldn't be an idiot and dare to teach someone how to throw a punch because I'm not a boxing expert. People should know their damn places.

 

[drop bear]

So you mean you're a pseudo-evolutionary psychologist. Got it. Or probably a bit more accurately, you're trying to transplant evolutionary biology to martial arts.

I looked it up.

Evolutionary psychology

evolutionary psychology, the study of behaviour, thought, and feeling as viewed through the lens of evolutionary biology. Evolutionary psychologists presume all human behaviours reflect the influence of physical and psychological predispositions that helped human ancestors survive and...

www.britannica.com

 

[frank raud]

I mean look at Judo. Who cares what Dr Kano taught about morality and gentleness? Just use Judo to hurt enemies and to defend yourself. At the end of the day, it is a self-defense system and an Olympic Sport designed for violent confrontations and athletic exhibitions.

I spent a good number of years playing Japanese roleplaying games, and a common theme on those games is this concept of a weaponless fist fighting character who is often labeled as a "monk". But look around you. That's not how it works in reality. Yi Long is the only actual Shaolin monk to ever reach a high level in competitive fighting and even then, he fights just like another violent kickboxer.

For me, the way I see it, my personal philosophy in martial arts is that all apes, humans included, must learn healthy ways to express aggression. In an age of conquest, this would have been appropriate through militaristic adventures. But we don't live in that age anymore. Instead, our heroes in this modern age are hollywood actors and athletes, so we make do with what we have. Instead of rallying our own troops for a literal war, we instead channel those ugly emotions through athletic pursuits. Combat is just another sport for me. There should be nothing spiritual about it. It's just another tool, like how Zen Meditation can help boost your mental faculties even if you are actually a Christian.

Please discuss!

Hi! I'm ignorant on martial arts and philosophy! Prove me wrong!

 

[Zombocalypse]

Hi! I'm ignorant on martial arts and philosophy! Prove me wrong!

Is that supposed to be a spoof of how I am? I don't get it.

But anyway, honestly, there's not a lot of people in this world who knows philosophy better than me. Very rare.

 

[Steve]

Okay...

You put a hundred men in a prison... I don't know, maybe they were falsely accused of a crime or maybe they are 100% psychopaths. It doesn't matter. You have a hundred of them in a prison.

One day, the head warden visits them in their lunch. He says, "Alright, you maggots! I'll give you a chance to earn not just your freedom, but also $10,000 and a guaranteed job placement as a roofer or some ****. I am bound by law to fulfill that promise. But under one condition... At the sound of my whistle, you motherfuckers have to go on a royal rumble and kill each other. The last man standing will be the only one to get his freedom. Now get ready."

Well then, the winner of that ordeal will be the one I'll listen to about martial arts. It's the reasoning as to why Krav Maga works. Those Jewish guys had to survive Nazi thugs in their area, and then Krav Maga was born. No spiritual woowoo ****, no bro-science, no fake black belts. It's real martial arts tempered and battle-tested in hostile environments.

Do Siberian tigers and safari lions take seminars on self-defense? No. They fight with instinct. Humans are the same. Fighting and all forms of combat have existed before the dawn of modern MMA. It's in our DNA to fight. We use what nature has given us. Instinct, strength, speed, skill... Whatever. I will always prefer to listen to the advice of a battle-hardened thug than some cozy businessman who overpaid some state-of-the-art Aikido coach from his white collar neighborhood.

Does that actually make sense? I don't think it holds up. It's an almost perfect non sequitur. In a battle royale style combat, one person has to win. And that's why Krav Maga works.

 

[punisher73]

"

"

MMA is more effective in the octagon or ring than traditional martial arts like Karate, Kung Fu, and Wing Chun. Karate has strong Japanese Buddhist roots, Kung Fu has Chinese Shaolin Buddhist roots, and Wing Chun is a spin-off of Kung Fu. I'm sure you're aware of the McDojo meme, and it is usually traditional martial arts that end up being seen as McDojos. There was a poster here who once said that BJJ is incredibly effective because it is an "honest" art that is willing to adapt. And you see, in order to adapt, you gotta leave your roots.

"

"

I tend to lump all Eastern combat arts as coming from the same thing. The dragon god of the Asians, who taught the Asian people (me included, since I'm Asian) the combat techniques meant to destroy the enemies of the world. Or at least the woowoo people think so.

You being a martial arts enthusiast I'm sure have heard of legendary Kung Fu warriors beating powerful opponents with their fists. Those are all ********. Absolute, complete, ********. They are legends. That is all they are. We can argue all day and night about the history of this, this, and that, but at the end of the day, all Eastern combat arts with a touch of mysticism all came from the same thing. Hindu, Buddhist, and Daoist philosophies. Don't deny it.

All I'm suggesting here is to disrespect those woowoo roots and use their techniques for what they were meant for. Destruction, defense, and domination. Cut off your traditions. I know I did and it was the best thing I've ever done for myself.

Your argument makes no sense at all. Karate does NOT have Buddhist roots (did you not read the Itosu quote). Again, that was something ADDED to it much later, same as other TMA's. You aren't going to find many, if ANY, martial arts that were designed from the ground up based on religion. Even "Shaolin Kung Fu" was designed by soldiers and military guys who sought shelter in the temple.

Here's the concept that you are failing to grasp. A punch is a punch is a punch. How effective it is going to be is based on the training methodology of that. There are quite a few MMA schools/classes that incorporate religious ideas into their training. Does that somehow make the techniques less effective? There are quite a few TMA schools/classes that do NOT incorporate religious ideas into their training. Does that somehow make their techniques more effective?

Look into the work of David Ross (NY Sanda). His base art is Tibetan Lama Pai which does have a lot of religious roots. He is very successful in it. The religious roots have NOTHING to do with it being good or not being good. It is how his guys train the art and their understanding of what the movements are for.

 

[Steve]

Is that supposed to be a spoof of how I am? I don't get it.

But anyway, honestly, there's not a lot of people in this world who knows philosophy better than me. Very rare.

Non sequitur is a formal logical fallacy, which makes it kind of bad philosophy.

 

[Steve]

Ah, never mind. I'm reacting to someone who literally uses troll face as his avatar.

 

[punisher73]

In roughly 10 years of aikido (four different dojos, different lineages) I've never been taught any of the founder's philosophy. And I strongly suspect that only a handful of teachers worldwide would be able to do so (mine were not, although they hold high ranks), because it's complex and obscure. What I suspect you may find (again, not in my experience) are teachers who preach hippy new age teachings derived from post-war marketing tactics and Western exoticism, but calling it a feature of the art is misleading IMO.

You are probably correct on teaching the "founder's philosophy". But, that doesn't change the fact the Ueshiba himself changed the techniques to fall in line with his philosophy in the creation of Aikido. Look at his earlier art before he called it Aikido, it was VERY different. So, while you might not learn his philosophy separately, the ideas are imbedded into the overall philosophy and technique execution itself.

 

[frank raud]

Is that supposed to be a spoof of how I am? I don't get it.

But anyway, honestly, there's not a lot of people in this world who knows philosophy better than me. Very rare.

seiryoku zen'you Maximum efficiency , minimum effort. Jita-Kyoei- Mutual benefit. The two major Judo maxims that establish Judo philosophy. How would Judo (your version of bastardised Judo) be better if your intent was not to be more efficient in motion, or did not benefit both practitioners? Unless of course you are referring to some other minor portion of philosophy as it apples to judo. Bonus points for explaining why you wouldn't want to follow the same ideas in your life outside of judo.

 

[isshinryuronin]

"Would MA be better without the spiritual aspect?" No. But the martial artist would be worse, lacking the morality and principles that guide him to use his MA responsibly and honorably. Without that, one is left with a savage, dangerous thug. I suppose one can choose what type of fighter he prefers to be. That's one point.

Another is that the philosophy/spirituality of TMA does contribute to the effectiveness of of MA, as you allow in your somewhat contradictory quote below:

There should be nothing spiritual about it. It's just another tool, like how Zen Meditation can help boost your mental faculties even if you are actually a Christian.

Zen is a type of spirituality that can help not only Christians, but martial artists as well. "Mizu no kokoro," (mind/heart like water) refers to having a calm attitude which allows for clearer and truer perception. This, in turn, allows for quicker and more accurate reaction, certainly a plus in MA.

Is spirituality just "another tool" that can be used? A tool is used for a specific purpose, then discarded or put away. Spirituality is something that resides internally and can be used constantly in everyday life. The principles and philosophies of MA can be applied to many endeavors. For this reason, the accomplished Samurai warriors were, according to Musashi, referred to as "strategists," something more than just fighters and to be respected in arenas other than the battlefield.

So, in a traditional sense (as opposed to just sport), is a true "martial artist" simply a fighter, or something more? I think it depends on one's aspirations in regards to MA.

 

[drop bear]

And by the way. I think no to the OPs proposal.

In that it is easy to be bad. But it takes courage and dedication to be good.

So if you remove that from martial arts you remove the strength it takes to fight.

 

[Zombocalypse]

seiryoku zen'you Maximum efficiency , minimum effort. Jita-Kyoei- Mutual benefit. The two major Judo maxims that establish Judo philosophy. How would Judo (your version of bastardised Judo) be better if your intent was not to be more efficient in motion, or did not benefit both practitioners? Unless of course you are referring to some other minor portion of philosophy as it apples to judo. Bonus points for explaining why you wouldn't want to follow the same ideas in your life outside of judo.

You make it effective by listening to shallow champions without an ounce of spirituality in their bones. If they graduated middle school, they are literate enough to explain combat techniques. These shallow, meat-head, uncouth champions who fought in competitions (Judo or MMA) and crushed their opponents have much richer opinions in combat than some founding father who wants everyone to be kind to others. Laughable.

Martial arts are nothing more than refined violence. That's what they all are. Strengthen your body, bolster your courage, hone your techniques, and you are worthy of being called a martial artist. Screw philosophy. That is my domain. Martial artists are and should always be brutish and uncouth.

Look at Krav Maga. Even though it has Jewish roots, the coaches don't teach the Old Testament in their training sessions. No. They go straight to the techniques.