Last Fearner
2nd Black Belt
While many of us are very passionate about the Martial Art, I agree that the passion should be tempered with mutual respect for one another. There is far too much verbal abuse on the internet, but it has been pointed out that Martial Talk is a very well monitored site for curbing the "flaming," and "bashing." It is really up to the individual participant here, as to how they are going to express their disagreements. Friendly discussions often turn into heated debates, which occasionally cross the line into insults, and personal attacks.
I have seen this far more often on other forums, and it is disgusting. However, I do consider that many "students" of the Martial Art (beginner, advanced, and instructors) are still in the developmental stages of their understanding, enlightenment, and personal character traits. Thus, people here will make mistakes (myself included) and say things in the impersonal world of the "www" that they might not otherwise. Then again, there are those who have no regret for behaving badly.
I like it when we can discuss topics, and even disagree with polite discourse, without the conversation degenerating to intentionally disrespectful insults. With that in mind, I would like to express a different point of view on something my fellow Martial Artist, Jeff, said. (<< smiley face to indicate this is meant in friendly discord)
I do not even agree with this implication 50% - actually, not at all. It is my observation that, historically, there have been physical combat among individuals since the beginning of human history. There has been the training of soldiers, and armies since the beginning of structured civilization, but none of this, in my opinion, inherently includes the true essence, or quality of the Martial Art. Simply because a group of thugs created a method of fighting that is still around today, does not make what they did a "Martial Art," even if today's students study it as such, and call it a Martial Art.
My philosophical observation of the emergence to that which I perceive as the Martial Art comes from a separation of intent between the core elements of combat and wars where a soldier's goal is often to "kill" the enemy, and the "art of the warrior" (a different philosophical breed of trained fighter) which is to protect, and preserve life, knowing that the taking of a life is only done for the just preservation of another life.
It is my personal belief that the Martial Art began, not with the goal, intent, or purpose to kill. That already existed, and still exists among non-martial art fighters, and is the stark difference between the two. The Martial Art was born out of love, compassion, an appreciation for the value of life, and a philosophical view that it is preferable not to kill. Although you have the inevitable contradictions that co-exist (like yin and yang, or um and yang), the true Martial Artist believes that all life is precious and should be protected. Yet, in doing so, the "Martial Warrior" learns skills that can end a life, and must sometime make the choice to do so in self defense, or defense of another.
While it will be difficult for some to let go of the notion that the "way of the Warrior" is to fight, or to kill, and that the original purpose of the Martial Art was to "fight, or to kill" (especially those who have held this belief for a long time), I respectfully contend that this is the opposite of the true nature, essence, and historical beginnings of the Martial Art. With the mergence of combative skills, the desire for self defense, and the philosophy of valuing all life, a threshold was crossed, and on the other side was the creation of the Martial Art - without the purpose, or intent to kill, but rather to protect life.
The technical skills between a soldier who is trained as a "killing machine," and a "Martial Warrior" is very much the same, but the mental intent, and purpose being to "kill" can exist among soldiers, but never has existed in true Martial Art philosophy.
This is how I have come to understand the history, development, and nature of the "Do." It is what makes the "Martial Art" what it is.
CM D.J. Eisenhart
I have seen this far more often on other forums, and it is disgusting. However, I do consider that many "students" of the Martial Art (beginner, advanced, and instructors) are still in the developmental stages of their understanding, enlightenment, and personal character traits. Thus, people here will make mistakes (myself included) and say things in the impersonal world of the "www" that they might not otherwise. Then again, there are those who have no regret for behaving badly.
I like it when we can discuss topics, and even disagree with polite discourse, without the conversation degenerating to intentionally disrespectful insults. With that in mind, I would like to express a different point of view on something my fellow Martial Artist, Jeff, said. (<< smiley face to indicate this is meant in friendly discord)
JeffJ said:But if you are going to use Martial Arts as the metaphor to help you in your journey to self improvement, remember that it came from one simple purpose. To kill.
Elayna said:Going to the posts in regards to martial arts starting out as a form a killing. I have to say that I agree 50%.
I do not even agree with this implication 50% - actually, not at all. It is my observation that, historically, there have been physical combat among individuals since the beginning of human history. There has been the training of soldiers, and armies since the beginning of structured civilization, but none of this, in my opinion, inherently includes the true essence, or quality of the Martial Art. Simply because a group of thugs created a method of fighting that is still around today, does not make what they did a "Martial Art," even if today's students study it as such, and call it a Martial Art.
My philosophical observation of the emergence to that which I perceive as the Martial Art comes from a separation of intent between the core elements of combat and wars where a soldier's goal is often to "kill" the enemy, and the "art of the warrior" (a different philosophical breed of trained fighter) which is to protect, and preserve life, knowing that the taking of a life is only done for the just preservation of another life.
It is my personal belief that the Martial Art began, not with the goal, intent, or purpose to kill. That already existed, and still exists among non-martial art fighters, and is the stark difference between the two. The Martial Art was born out of love, compassion, an appreciation for the value of life, and a philosophical view that it is preferable not to kill. Although you have the inevitable contradictions that co-exist (like yin and yang, or um and yang), the true Martial Artist believes that all life is precious and should be protected. Yet, in doing so, the "Martial Warrior" learns skills that can end a life, and must sometime make the choice to do so in self defense, or defense of another.
While it will be difficult for some to let go of the notion that the "way of the Warrior" is to fight, or to kill, and that the original purpose of the Martial Art was to "fight, or to kill" (especially those who have held this belief for a long time), I respectfully contend that this is the opposite of the true nature, essence, and historical beginnings of the Martial Art. With the mergence of combative skills, the desire for self defense, and the philosophy of valuing all life, a threshold was crossed, and on the other side was the creation of the Martial Art - without the purpose, or intent to kill, but rather to protect life.
The technical skills between a soldier who is trained as a "killing machine," and a "Martial Warrior" is very much the same, but the mental intent, and purpose being to "kill" can exist among soldiers, but never has existed in true Martial Art philosophy.
This is how I have come to understand the history, development, and nature of the "Do." It is what makes the "Martial Art" what it is.
CM D.J. Eisenhart