I was thinking about this other day and decided to pose the question to all of you.

When do you think you "understand" your art? When did you realize that your art isn't just a series of movements that you do because your sensei told you to do it?

The reason why I started thinking about this is because a good friend of mine started training in shotokan, I've been doing it for a few months as well, with a brand new instructor. I talked to his instructor and his total Martial Arts experience is about 3.5 years.

I didn't say anything to him, out of respect ...and the fact that he's probably kick my behind!! :), but I don't think it's really possible to completely understand an art enough to pass that knowledge onto others.

What are your thoughts?

FYI: He is the sole instructor ...I would be more understanding if he was an assistant instructor.

I can not say when I felt I understtod my art. The basic idea ,break and distroy, is not hard to understand, but the art itslef thats different.
I know that I was part of it, or it was a part of me when I tried to stop practiceing the first time and something was different in my life. Something was missing and I had to start practiceing again. Yes I tried to walk away from it more than once, but guess what, I'm still in it learning and teaching.
Shadow:asian:

The moment you think you have it, you have already lost it...

When you consider yourself a "saint," you are likely ineligible for the job.

If you think you are a "master," odds are you were never qualified to submit the application.

The moment you think you are getting it is the moment your teacher(s) should show you something new to remind you that you never will...

Gambarimasu.

Every time I think I'm beginning to understand one part of it, I get slapped back into reality and realize that I'm still just a beginner.

I am always confused...........and just when I think I have gotten a good grasp on something my teacher will throw me another "cookie" and it's back to square one.


My teacher said at 70+ years of age with more then 50 years of training under his belt he is only partially understanding his art and still learning.

My teacher said at 70+ years of age with more then 50 years of training under his belt he is only partially understanding his art and still learning.

The gentelman has a true wisdom.
If only some of these instant grandmasters and mail order black belts had enough sence to realise what your instructor has, that being that we are students and always learning as long as we are in the arts.
Shadow:asian:

With 3.5 years in his art he is indeed new. However if he is the only teacher available, learn from him what you can. If he approaches teaching seriously, he will get better as he teaches. In addition, take advantage of seminars with more experianced teachers as you can. I began teaching as an assistant in judo at 13 yrs. old with only 1 year of training. 34 years later I continue to learn and will learn what I can from whoever has anything to teach, I don't care what color sash they wear. I'm listening!!!! The good I'll keep, the bad I'll ignore.

Peace
Dennis

I think I understand my art. AM I good at it not as good as I like but I understand what the philosphy behind the art and I understand the goal of techs. DO I know everything hardley but I understand the goal so the steps to the goal come easier. BJ Penn got his BB FAST so anything is possable.

Define "understand."

If you mean an intellectual understanding of the principles, then it is never-ending because as you understand one level, another more complicated one waits for you.

If you mean a KNOWLEDGE of your art, then the time it takes is much longer...

Never-ending multiplied by much longer equals NEVER.

Perhaps when you take your final breath, you will know.

:asian:
chufeng

You begin to understand your art when you realise you understand very little at all.

Originally posted by Nyoongar
You begin to understand your art when you realise you understand very little at all.


I was just about to write : never... when I read this.

This is good. Nice input Nyoongar

/Yari

I thought I understood my art. I was very confident then, I suddenly realized that I know nothing. No matter how much you do, no matter how much you understand, no matter how good you are at a kata. You can always improve and learn more. That is the essence of Martial Arts.

Personally, I believe that there are many levels of "understanding". A week before my first iaijutsu class I didn't even know what iaijutsu was, I couldn't even remember having heard the word before. A week after my first class I actually understood a lot more (on a superficial level) of what iai was about. After three years of hard training, I had a much deeper understanding of the physical forms of iai and their applications. After not being able to train in iai for a few years, and having just gone back to it, I feel I have a greater understanding of what this art means to me on a personal level, and to some extent on a more philosophical level. Do I fully understand my art? No. Will I ever? Very probably not, or if I'm a little more honest with myself, no.

Iaido, like other martial arts, is finally about life and death. When you learn a technique that has the potential to take a life, you cannot say you fully understand that technique on all it's levels unless you also fully understand what it means to take a life, and all the implications that involves. One cannot understand what it means to take a life, unless one understands life itself, in all it's totallity. The greatest philisophers and religious thinkers of the ages have struggled with the questions of life and death and their meanings, and have not even come close to an answer. So can one ever fully understand one's art? No.

Does all this mean I'm not gonna try? Heck no!

The original question gives the impression that a martial art is ever really understood?

understanding as others already said is ongoing process but there's levels of it... something like when u r beginner u learn to block for defense as u grow older in art u learn to deflect then intercept, these are all the levels(physical) which u can see/feel at every appropriate time every understanding is rite... now when u now u can deflect u don't care to meet force with force blocks...simple as that...
-TkdWarrior-

There is no reason to understand a martial art. They are simply tools for help you to understand how your body works against (or in conjunction with) another person(s).

Originally posted by Arithon
There is no reason to understand a martial art. They are simply tools for help you to understand how your body works against (or in conjunction with) another person(s).

INteressting, elaborate please....

/Yari

Lets just forget about styles, philosophy etc. etc. for a moment. Martial arts is about resolving physical conflict between yourself and another person/people in the most efficient way possible.
If someone attacts you, given their physical characteristics, momentum, relative position to you, etc., there is a pefect technique for this and only this situation that would resolve the situation. (ie beat the crap out of the other people)
But of course this cannot be taught in any class room. So instead we learn generic techniques: punches, kicks, throws etc.
But we can't apply these techniques exactly as they were taught because the opponent will be slightly/greatly different to our partners in class.
So as well as learning how to do a particular technique we have to learn about techniques in general. What are the general things that are the same no matter what the technique is. And on a more basic level we have to learn how to move better. How to use our bodies more efficiently.
This is very hard to do by yourself becuase your have little to no feed back. This is why we have to have training partners.
I belive a master is someone who can, given a fighting situation, spontaneously create a series of movements that will defeat his/her opponents.
Martial arts/techniques are the tools you use to learn about your body and mind. Nothing more.

First you state that there is no reason to understand a martial art.

Then you call it a tool for understanding yourself.

I can follow both , but only upto a certain point. And that's because you base your thought on what is best.

Best is a personal opion. You can think that the greatest momentum is best, while another means that the more circular you are is best (and therefor not greatest in momentum). If there really was one thing that was best, dont you think all of us would be doing it.

So to find the best you cant look at the tool, but to the art. You cant call a weapon dangerous without looking at who's handling it and how, even if the weapon is very effektiv.

/yari

Regardless of style I would define best as the most efficient, effortless and painless (and possibly quickest) method of resolving the situation. There would be more than one of these for any situation of course.
The techniques you use will be determined by the desired outcome. If you want to restrain a person you would use locks and holds. If you want to do something else you would use another method.
What are you saying with your last statement? Of course a weapon is only as dangerous as the person wielding it. And I'm saying that the arts are tools for learning and you say that you can't look at the tool but the art....

I didn't really read through this thread. I just read the original question and am responding to it. So if I repeat things said by others ... well, it never hurts to revisit good points :)

An instructorship doesn't mean you've mastered anything. It simply means, according to your instructor or organization, you've demonstrated the required understanding to start teaching others.

It doesn't take a great level of understanding to start teaching. I mean, a high school graduate has a lot he/she can teach a grade schooler.


To teach is to learn twice. -- Joseph Joubert

If you would thoroughly know anything, teach it to others. -- Tryon Edwards


These two quotes are important. Gaining an instructorship really means that you're ready to really start learning.

With only 3.5 years of training, his depth of understanding is probably somewhat limited. But if he can communicate what he understands, then he can teach it. And, by teaching it, he will gain more depth. Unless he puts blinders on and stops accepting input, then his student(s) will never catch up to him because he'll be learning as much from them as they do from him (this is true of any instructor, regardless of background).

As for him being an instructor after 3.5 years ... every one progresses at different rates. Assuming he's legitimately trained and not making up his rank, then, according to his instructor, he was ready to start teaching.

It took me 4.5 years in Sikal to get my instructorship, but I was the exception that proves the rule. The other instructors (my peers, there are only 4 of us currently) took an average of 6 years (one took 5, one took 6, one took 7). But during those 4.5 years, I was training 20 - 30 hours / week, every single week - and I had a mind/memory which allowed me to absorb and remember so I could analyze and understand later. Also, I had a very understanding wife :) However, I also had 15 years of previous MA background before I started training in Sikal, and it helped.

Could I have done it 4.5 years without the previous training? I think so. It may have taken me 5 years, but I don't know. But the curriculum my instructor was teaching was extensive with a lot of material to train and retain. Other systems may have more or less.

Each person is different. Each system is different.

I've never trained in Shotokan, but when I trained in Okinawan Goju-Ryu, 5 years was about average to get a shodan. Which means that, theoretically, if someone was really driven and dedicated, they might be able to do it in 3.5 years.

Would they have the depth of understanding of someone with more background? Probably not. But they should have enough to teach newbies.

As far as "mastery" goes ... one of my Eskrima instructors says, "I didn't feel that I had 'mastered' anything in Eskrima until I'd been training in it for 40 years." And he wasn't saying he'd mastered the art, just specific aspects of it. He's in his 80s and started training when he was, I believe, 6. He goes on to say, though, that he learns something new each day, even with 75+ years of training :)

As far as your friend's specific situation ... only time will tell whether his instructor is worth his salt or not.

Mike

Good Evening,

Understanding an art has myriad levels of meaning. The most obvious would be cultural, technical, philososphical, or strategic/tactical. Yet each of the above have so many sub-categories it boggles the mind--so much more than people realize when they take up training. I think that's why so many have alluded to never fully knowing an art, especially if it is a system where rote imitation is not encouraged, and finding your expression is not discouraged.

In the system(s) I study there is so much more than just the technical sylabus. I can remember when "knowing" all of the core waza was so important to me. Then I found that I didn't know much at all. The mechanical techniques were far less important than realizing the principles expressed through the techniques. How the relationship between tori and uke was managed. How controlling/exploiting/fitting-into the space and timing interval of the opponent was handled. How to lock the entire skeletal structure rather than just relying on the torque and momentum of winding a single joint or limb. Those are just basic examples of understanding the physical part of an art.

There are so many other factors that are on a so-called higher level; whether dealing with the understanding of the psychology of cofrontation or the manipulation of the opponent's psychology(might call this mental misdirection). Or simply trying to understand the mental/cultural paradigm that created the "feeling" that your chosen art has.

All of these factors are lifelong studies. So I would say understanding is not something you arrive at, but rather something that only broadens throughout a lifetime of study.

Originally posted by Arithon
What are you saying with your last statement?

You cant judge a technique from what you see, but how it's handled in the style it's presented.

What your saying is defining your own style and filosofi, shich is OK for me.

/Yari

Originally posted by Yari
First you state that there is no reason to understand a martial art.

Then you call it a tool for understanding yourself.

I can follow both , but only upto a certain point. And that's because you base your thought on what is best.

Best is a personal opion. You can think that the greatest momentum is best, while another means that the more circular you are is best (and therefor not greatest in momentum). If there really was one thing that was best, dont you think all of us would be doing it.

So to find the best you cant look at the tool, but to the art. You cant call a weapon dangerous without looking at who's handling it and how, even if the weapon is very effektiv.

/yari

Care to elaborate what an "opion" is? Just kidding.

The "best" is referring to us as individuals and our self dicovery as to what is best for "us" individually.

I say a lot that I am a grappler at heart but I am a standup fighter by nature. By undestanding my "best" it would not be the same for a BJJ fighter.

Its the process of using the tools which themselves are individuals in a toolbox. Which tools used depend on the situation. When you are proficient with your tools you dissolve the tools to where there is just you.

You don't use tech #2 for A attacks B. There is no thinking involved, you just do.

The tools or weapons are not what matters. The only thing that matters is the reaction.

Originally posted by Arithon
There is no reason to understand a martial art. They are simply tools for help you to understand how your body works against (or in conjunction with) another person(s).

I do not agree with the there is no reason to understand a martial art.

If you have no understanding, you should be running not fighting!

Originally posted by chufeng
Define "understand."

If you mean an intellectual understanding of the principles, then it is never-ending because as you understand one level, another more complicated one waits for you.

If you mean a KNOWLEDGE of your art, then the time it takes is much longer...

Never-ending multiplied by much longer equals NEVER.

Perhaps when you take your final breath, you will know.

:asian:
chufeng

I may never get there. But I will still be me and I will continue on...

Originally posted by akja

The "best" is referring to us as individuals and our self dicovery as to what is best for "us" individually.
.....
The tools or weapons are not what matters. The only thing that matters is the reaction.

I agree most of the way. But..... "the only thing that matters is the reaction".

Which reaction? ;)


/Yari

I suppose when you successfully use it to defend your life, or the life of a loved one in real life and death combat. Does that mean you know everything there is to know about the art ? Maybe not, but you understood it enough to use it for it's original purpose....survival.

I think the problem is there is a diffrence between mastering and understanding. When I hear understand I think of knowing what is going on not understanding the art inside and out.

Originally posted by Mya Ryu Jitsu
I suppose when you successfully use it to defend your life, or the life of a loved one in real life and death combat. Does that mean you know everything there is to know about the art ? Maybe not, but you understood it enough to use it for it's original purpose....survival.

Ahh, it rings so true, but....... if there is a fight and I clobber him with my wallet, which is full of dimes, and it frightens him so he runs away. Can I really defend myself?

Yes in this case I did, can I do it again? Probably no.

Everbody can get out af one fight in there life, but slanting the odds so that you have a bigger chance of getting out of every fight is something else.

/Yari

Ahh, but I'm specifically refering to using a technique or techniques as well as tactics to obtain a successfull conclusion.

One could also argue that getting oneself out of the fight, be it verbage or evasion is also understanding the art.

Things that make you go Hmmmmm:D

I will never understand my art.

I understand ideas and concepts, based on what rank I am, how much training I do, and how much I learn from those my rank and above. I understand these, but only for a little while, and then I lose it again.

It is a LOT like that quote from "Men In Black".....think about what you'll *know* tomorrow. I learn things as I progress, and I feel like I "understand" them.....until I learn something that builds on that piece of information, and then there I am again, back at the beginning. It's a neverending process.

This is good, because it always gives me a reason to smile. I smile because my old ignorance and misunderstanding is replaced with a new ignorance and misunderstanding. :)

When I fully understand my art, I will be long dead.

Peace--

Probably when you finally figured out what parts of your art/style actually serve to maximize effectiveness and efficiency, and which parts of it merely serve to differentiate it from another art/style.

People tend to say they have to perform the blocking in such and such way, or to strike in such and such way, otherwise, they wouldn't be following their style.

When you can cut through the material force-fed to you and filter out the useful, then you have achieved a level of understanding and start the true journay of being free from the constrains of style. Note: Be prepared to be unbraided for your "arrogance" in defying tradition.

not yet.

but I think I'm starting to get the idea.....

~TT

"When I started learning martial arts, a kick was just a kick and a punch was just a punch.

After studying a while, I found that a kick was no longer a kick, and a punch no longer a punch.

Now that I've studied a long time, I have come to realize that a kick is just a kick and a punch is just a punch."

Unless you are a teacher or philosopher (or both), understanding isn't as important as practice and "being" your art.

If you insist on understanding, I always tell my students that only until you've done something a thousand times (no exaggeration), will it start to reveal its secrets to you.

But understanding and mastery are two not-so-interdependent things.

MASTERY is when you have "Kung Fu" in what you are doing. It is not only effortless and natural, but to others it looks easy.

Understanding your art can "other forms" in the sense that a part of my art is ground grappling and I teach my students to understand the ground grappler before they specialize in their ground work.

Once they undestand "how" a ground grappler will come at them, how they will react and what they will try and look for, they will "understand" the ground grappler and be able to stop them.

The same goes for the stand up game. I find it important to teach my students to come to an understanding with all of their martial art training. I teach 65% stand up and 35% ground grappling (roughly). My students may choose differant paths or differant paths may choose them.

Its my job to guide them to their "understanding" so I must make them understand and be "functional" in more than just one primary art and help them to specialize in the art(s) according to their potential.

So I guess I'm saying that understanding can take on differant meanings but dosen't have to come late in your training. Some might not even realize how well that they understand their art.


:asian:

Perhaps "understanding" an art is a little vague, but there are certainly specific milestones that every person reaches (if they study long enough) in any art. The ones I have in mind are:

-They acquire a good skill level with the basics.

-They become able to easily put the basics into combinations in order to achieve greater results with less effort.

-They become able to "lead" an opponent down a certain path by developing the ability to set him up (using any of the techniques of their art, not just their favorites).

-They become able to use the techniques of their art at will against a skilled practitioner of any other art.

Each of these stages happen at different levels in different arts. Many people think Black Belt is the level at which they have acquired a good skill level with the basics (and they may well be right!). In some arts the last level I described could well be 10th Degree black belt, or close to it.

Certainly talking about it in terms of skill level and results makes it easier to determine, rather than the notion of "understanding," which will mean different things to different people.

~TT

Originally posted by twinkletoes
Perhaps "understanding" an art is a little vague, but there are certainly specific milestones that every person reaches (if they study long enough) in any art. The ones I have in mind are:

-They acquire a good skill level with the basics.

-They become able to easily put the basics into combinations in order to achieve greater results with less effort.

-They become able to "lead" an opponent down a certain path by developing the ability to set him up (using any of the techniques of their art, not just their favorites).

-They become able to use the techniques of their art at will against a skilled practitioner of any other art.

Each of these stages happen at different levels in different arts. Many people think Black Belt is the level at which they have acquired a good skill level with the basics (and they may well be right!). In some arts the last level I described could well be 10th Degree black belt, or close to it.

Certainly talking about it in terms of skill level and results makes it easier to determine, rather than the notion of "understanding," which will mean different things to different people.

~TT

My definition of "understanding" is directly related to skill level.

I think some underestimate what they really know and as the arts do "humble us" to a certain extent, I can see that happening easily.

I tell my students that although we are primarily stand up fighters, that for them to reach Brown Belt they need to "functional" ground grapplers.

And also if they are not, I failed!

:asian:

akja,

I agree. You make some good points there.

How can we bridge the gap between "understanding" an art and having skill in it?

Certainly reaching advanced skill levels requires a strong understanding of it, but what happens when the opposite occurs? What about schools where everyone can "talk the talk" but can't "walk the walk?"

Can an emphasis on "understanding" be a bad thing?

~TT

as Einstein once said "all you can ever understand is very little"...so based on that, I think you'll understand when you know that you don't know.

Originally posted by Ender
as Einstein once said "all you can ever understand is very little"...so based on that, I think you'll understand when you know that you don't know.

I don't think that applies here.

Originally posted by twinkletoes
akja,

I agree. You make some good points there.

How can we bridge the gap between "understanding" an art and having skill in it?

Certainly reaching advanced skill levels requires a strong understanding of it, but what happens when the opposite occurs? What about schools where everyone can "talk the talk" but can't "walk the walk?"

Can an emphasis on "understanding" be a bad thing?

~TT

I definately can talk the talk but you don't know me from squat and with that said, it would be very easy for someone to deceive the public and then yes the understanding could be a bad thing.

But the other side of that one is in some of those schools the instructor may just not train anymore for many differant possible reasons. But when needed on the spur of the moment life or death situation. His "understanding" will probably save his life.

:asian:

Originally posted by akja
I don't think that applies here.

I do.

With one exception, the only people who failed a test in my old school were the ones that "knew" they were ready.

I was thinking of even less sinister circumstances. Something that happens a lot in particular with young martial artists (though it CERTAINLY happens with a lot of adults too) is that you get people who can explain the art, technique, correct response, etc. very well, but couldn't do it to save their life.

It's those guys who can tell you "Oh, I saw you having a hard time in the ring against that big guy. It's easy, you get in close and keep your hands like this, and you'll beat him." These are the same guys who when they get in the ring perform very poorly. Yet afterwards they can explain how they could have beaten their opponent "Oh yeah, he was keeping me off with his jab, but what you do against a guy like that is follow it in and crash...." not that they were able to pull it off.

We find that sometimes young students at our school go through something like this as they get older. They understand how to do a move, or how to deal with a scenario, but their ability ends with explaining. They can't get in there and do it.

"Oh yeah, well when he counters your hip throw like this, you reverse him like that."

Now, I have been to schools in person in which EVERY student is like this. They are probably more common than we want to know.

What I find with people (adults) like this is that it's almost always not their own fault: they aren't being a dick, or weird people, but it comes from their instruction. The instruction is not from a performance oriented setup, but from a knowledge set up. Tests focus on what they "know" and not what they can do.

(I know that I said students at our school do this. I know it also sounds like I'm criticizing that method a little. Well, it's true. I don't agree with this part of the instruction at the kenpo school where I teach.)

Our job as instructors is to impart skill, the way AKJA mentioned earlier. Otherwise, when our students get jumped, they will explain to their assailant(s) what they could have done to them to prevent it......

~TT

Originally posted by twinkletoes
I was thinking of even less sinister circumstances. Something that happens a lot in particular with young martial artists (though it CERTAINLY happens with a lot of adults too) is that you get people who can explain the art, technique, correct response, etc. very well, but couldn't do it to save their life. ...

Sinister?

What about the million-dollar boxing coach or olympic trainer?

Are we always so different from other arts?

Stephen Hawking can't even throw a ball -- should he be teaching physics?

Ken,

I'm speaking of people who intend to be practitioners, not trainers. However, the best coaches in an athletic field are the ones with experience.

~TT

i believe you understand your art when you get the underlying concepts. when your thoughts become smaller instead of larger, when you can see how all the advanced moves are breed from the core basics. when your realize that the art is just concepts of movement and that the attribrute development is where it's at.

note that this is understanding your art, not master or knowing everything.

Originally posted by sercuerdasfigther
i believe you understand your art when you get the underlying concepts. when your thoughts become smaller instead of larger, when you can see how all the advanced moves are breed from the core basics. when your realize that the art is just concepts of movement and that the attribrute development is where it's at.

note that this is understanding your art, not master or knowing everything.

Well Done!:asian: