discussion of philosophy

[wolfeyes2323]

Greetings :

“Do you spar in class?”
^..^
Yes sometimes

“Do you, when sparring your opponent, attempt to kill them in the same manner in
which you would kill an opponent in a life and death sitation?”
^..^
No off course not.

‘Do you use sparring as an effective tool with which to learn how to deal with
a resisting opponent in a "realtime" situation?”

No , How to deal with a resisting opponent is inherent in proper technique.
If you learn and practice the technique properly you are doing this.
This is really a matter of learning to feel or listen with the body,
and there are better wayS to train this then competitive kumite.

many martial arts are centuries old, competitive kumite is a recent
development , resulting from incorporating karate into schools.
Sport karate and Kumite have their roots is a childhood activity
that is not a measure of actual fighting ability.

look at the masters of Martial Art pre_1900, they did not use kumite
to train, yet they were effective enough that we still practice these
methods today. These are the TMA, Competitive Kumite is a new
development which most of the old masters did not favor.

Kumite is a exercise for the mind and ego,
it allows those who have doubts about their actual abilities and techniques
to gain confidence, and it also allows the young who are developing
a sense of self to measure and test their abilities in a controlled
environment, where injury should not result.

Actual Fighting should have nothing to do with EGO, or with measuring,
or with building confidence etc, this is dojo activity.

Are these necessary attributes for students (confidence and self knowledge etc)
yes, but there are also other ways to build this , other than free kumite.

“Now, if you spar, but you consciously try to kill, maim, or otherwise injure
your opponent and honestly mean them ill will...that's not sparring..that's actually fighting,
and you would be no better off than the MMA competitors that you're referring to.”

TMA train NOT TO FIGHT.

“I have 100% confidence that I can take care of myself and/or my family in a real
SD situation, because I spar on a regular basis.”

when you are 60+ years old, are you still going to rely on
Kumite technique for self defense ?

Romney^..^

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Greetings :

TMA train NOT TO FIGHT.

Only in the twentieth century and afterwards, and then, only in the west until very late in the twentieth century.

Koryo arts were developed for use on the battlefield. They trained to fight and to kill.

No, training alone is not enough to test one's technique against a resisting opponent. Koryo arts may not have had a formal kumite, but make no mistake, they did practice against resisting opponents in training.

To say that TMA train not to fight is not historically accurate by any measure.

Daniel

 

[wolfeyes2323]

"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence
Supreme excellence consists in breaking your opponent resistence without fighting"
Sun Tzu chapter 3.

Training to kill is not the same as training to fight.
Fighting implies contention , in life and death matters
we should not wish to confront on equal terms ,struggle or contend .
We strive to resolve the issue by avoiding if possible ,
or using compromise , if this is not possible, By using surprise , stealth ,
or over powering superiority to destroy .
The last thing desired is a pitched battle , especially
with a formidable or desperate opponent.

Training not to fight , is training not to find your self
confronting such a enemy, if he exists, avoid him,
if you can not then compromise , give him what he
wants if possible , if that is not possible kill him
when he has no chance, When he is unprepared
etc, if he is not unprepared, make him so ,
if he is rash anger him, if he is in a strong position
move him, these are the skills of a warrior,
not Meet each opponent , allow him to prepare ,
and be ready and vigilant, and then attack his
strength , and match our strength against his .
This is A FIGHT , that should be avoided.

Kumite is about equals meeting and using physical
skills, and strength to prove who is superior,

Martial arts Only contend or attack when they
are assured of victory, or , it is the best ,
and only chance for victory.

We train to use the opponents power and strength
against him, not to resist and try to over power
him with our own power and strength.

The goal of warfare (martial confrontation ) is not
to slug it out , this is the most costly type of warfare,
the goal of Marital arts is to achieve victory while not
slugging it out.

the Okinawans are a perfect example, they managed to
maintain a independent kingdom and cultural identity
while being caught between two military super powers
which they could not possibly contend with via direct
conflict . If they would have chosen to fight and
contend with these powers they would have been
obliterated , They chose NOT to fight or contend
because they could not Win in such a manner,
but in so doing they actually achieved their goal,
they preserved their country , they saved the life
of their king and royal family, they preserved the
life of their people and their warriors, in this
sense they won by not fighting .

The Kanji for Bu (as in BuDo ) means Stop, War
it does not mean fight or kill.
Stopping war or fighting begins with ourselves,
we should avoid this if possible, and if not possible
destroy or obliterate our enemy . The Goal either way
Is NOT TO FIGHT.

The goal of Martial matters is to either not contend or, to kill.
There is no reason to fight with someone unless
I have something to prove, otherwise , survival
is the only thing that matters.

The Japanese did the same thing when Commodore Perry
sailed up the river and trained his guns on the Japanese
capital , they negotiated and accepted conditions which
they would have rejected if they had not been confronted
with superior fire power, they essentially chose NOT
to fight or Contend, because doing so , would have
caused damage to their Capital and dignitaries and
culture, they in essence did exactly what the Okinawans
did.
This is Martial thinking, and not that of sport or civil contention.
It is Not Fighting , but achieving ones goals .

Unfortunately Not fighting and not killing are not always the same thing.
Romney^..^

 

[blindsage]

I think you've been reading too much Japanese martial philosophy. If you are training for war then, yes, either not fighting or killing would be the goal. Fortunately most of us, and most people in the history of the world, are not preparing for war. Learning to fight is just that, learning how to end a conflict with you as the victor. If you're only preparing to either not fight, or if you have to to kill, have fun in the supermax prison your headed for. You're not a samurai in the court of a shogun in medievel Japan. Those philosophical ideas are interesting, but only have marginal relevance for the contemporary world.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

Romney,

You have a poor understanding of kumite. Techniques that are untested against a resisting opponent generally get those who use them into trouble, hurt or killed when they finally must rely upon them. That is the purpose of kumite: to train, not to contend.

Also, you have a very romanticized notion of warfare and killing.

Warfare is fighting on a larger scale. To kill another using unarmed martial training is to contend with them; few people will simply 'let' you kill them, and if you bank on a killing stoke on your first try, you may want to find a new banker.

Daniel

 

[wolfeyes2323]

Actually it would be Chinese philosophy , but, yes it was adopted by the Japanese .

Each day is a trial of life and death, Your survival many be contingent on you vigilance
and preparedness.

Do you practice a Martial art or a Civil art, most are confused about this,
The premise of Martial arts is to NOT FIGHT,
In a civil art or sport you may train to fight,
You seem confused do you know what you are practicing ?

I would worry more about prison if I was training to fight and achieve victory ,
this is exactly the type of thinking which leads to law suits and prison time.
I know this from EXPERIENCE, hopefully you will come to this understanding
before you have the same experience.

As for being a Samurai , No I do not follow this path, this is the path to DEATH,
and the culture of death,

I train to LIVE, and LET LIVE.

Where is the virtue in fighting ?
virtue is in sparing not in fighting .

It is in knowing that we are not the initiator of violence,
that we have taken every step we could to avoid it,
that leads us to understand that our aggressor brings
violence upon himself, and , we are then completely within
the law to respond in a manner consistent with the threat

What threat is a drunk swinging at a trained Martial artist ?
should I fight him ? or maybe , save him from himself
by not fighting him. If I do not fight and embarrass him
today I will not need to fight him again tomorrow ,
and I will not need to concern myself with the law either.

If I harm him and embarrass him today, I will fight him
again, and he will bring the equalizer this time,
either friends, a gun, knife something, and
I will definitely run up against the law.

Which is better to fight or not fight , and in which case am
I actually most likely to see the inside of a cell ?

Romney^..^

 

[wolfeyes2323]

"You have a poor understanding of kumite. Techniques that are
untested against a resisting opponent generally get those who use
them into trouble, hurt or killed when they finally must rely upon them."

^..^ Hmmmmm
I would say you have no understanding of training methods, and actual techniques,
other than those which rely on our own power or strength.

There are many forms of Kumite, squaring off with a opponent and matching
skills bound by rules in a well lit open (padded) area,
is the least effective training method for a actual encounter
in which , your attacker is not likely to fight in this manner, or possess these
same skills, is likely to be armed, or in superior numbers, in a obstructed
or confined area, filled with objects etc.

If you square off in the above situation , you will not be going home.

So what kind of FIGHT are you training for ?
Is your opponent armed , are there many opponents etc , or
are you dancing around the room with a single opponent, matching
skills with him, unconcerned about the rest of your surroundings ?

I would say if you are not training to end violent encounters rapidly
you are wasting your time with kumite , unless you are practicing
for competition of some kind, or looking to fight a single individual
in a backyard some where.

In TMA, kumite consists of training methods practiced between two
individuals , where realistic responses are used,
In fact most technique rely on these responses to work effectively,

the opponent gives you the opportunity for his own defeat,
you learn to use his own power , strength and attacks
against him, accounting for his reaction or responses,
in the end, effective technique limits the options of your
opponent, and then takes these options
away from him.

The above is done through change of position in a real environment,
in using postures , in using your opponents mind and
reactions against him etc.

the key to victory is Not in fighting him, and trying to attack or
defeat him. victory is achieved by allowing your opponents to defeat
themselves.

“few people will simply 'let' you kill them, and if you bank on a killing
stoke on your first try, you may want to find a new banker.”


With this statement you are still missing the point ,
I would not try and do anything to my opponent,
it is when he attempts to do something to me, that he
will be defeated. when he is expecting to be striking
me down, he will not be expecting or resisting his
own demise.
I would not kill ANYONE , I may not be able to control
my opponent from bringing their own destruction upon
their self.

Romney^..^

 

[Xue Sheng]

Actually it would be Chinese philosophy , but, yes it was adopted by the Japanese .

Source on this please

How are you linking this to China?

As for being a Samurai , No I do not follow this path, this is the path to DEATH,
and the culture of death,

Well actually no.... it is more of a Zen Buddhist view of suffering and letting go of suffering through mindfulness and some is Shinto as well. And of course a whole lot of rules found in Bushido. They just happened to be in the business that was kill or be killed much like any soldier you find today.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

I would say you have no understanding of training methods, and actual techniques,
other than those which rely on our own power or strength.

Then you would be incorrect. You do not understand the meaning of resisting opponent.

There are many forms of Kumite, squaring off with a opponent and matching skills bound by rules in a well lit open (padded) area,
is the least effective training method for a actual encounter
in which , your attacker is not likely to fight in this manner, or possess these
same skills, is likely to be armed, or in superior numbers, in a obstructed
or confined area, filled with objects etc.

Now you're talking about sport. Kumite was developed before such affectations as padding and modern tournament rules.

If you square off in the above situation , you will not be going home.

Agreed.

So what kind of FIGHT are you training for ?

One that I hope will never take place; an attack from assailant or assailants, armed or unarmed, seeking to do me harm. What kind of fight are you training for? Or are you training at all?

Is your opponent armed , are there many opponents etc , or
are you dancing around the room with a single opponent, matching
skills with him, unconcerned about the rest of your surroundings ?

People train for different reasons and different outcomes. Some train for SD against armed opponents, some train to stay alive in a violent confrontation.

I would say if you are not training to end violent encounters rapidly you are wasting your time with kumite , unless you are practicing
for competition of some kind, or looking to fight a single individual
in a backyard some where.

Agreed.

In TMA, kumite consists of training methods practiced between two individuals , where realistic responses are used,

In theory.

In fact most technique rely on these responses to work effectively,the opponent gives you the opportunity for his own defeat,
you learn to use his own power , strength and attacks
against him, accounting for his reaction or responses,
in the end,

There is a stage where the partner must do this in order for a student to learn the mechanics of the technique. Unless the student is forced to apply the technique against a noncompliant partner, however, they will never be able to execute the technique against an assailant.

effective technique limits the options of your
opponent, and then takes these options
away from him

The above is done through change of position in a real environment,
in using postures , in using your opponents mind and
reactions against him etc.

Agreed, but you must first have effective technique in order to use effective technique. If you only practice your techniques solo, against a practice dummy, or a compliant partner, you will not develop effective technique.

the key to victory is Not in fighting him, and trying to attack or defeat him. victory is achieved by allowing your opponents to defeat
themselves.

Agreed, but you must have the effective technique in order to lead the opponent to their own self defeat.

“few people will simply 'let' you kill them, and if you bank on a killing stoke on your first try, you may want to find a new banker.”[/i]
With this statement you are still missing the point ,
I would not try and do anything to my opponent,
it is when he attempts to do something to me, that he
will be defeated. when he is expecting to be striking
me down, he will not be expecting or resisting his
own demise.

Not missing the point; unless you're banking on him tripping over himself and knocking himself out, response action is required on your part. My point was that people do not simply defeat themselves without some help.

I would not kill ANYONE , I may not be able to control my opponent from bringing their own destruction upon
their self.

Incorrect. Your statement reads that you would kill someone, but that you are not responsible for their "destruction" because their initial action brought about their defeat by your killing stroke.

In any case, I was using the term, 'killing stroke' loosely. I'll replace it with finishing stroke.

Either way, you are banking on being able to immediately kill, render unconscious, or otherwise disable an opponent with one stroke. You imply that this is guaranteed. Nothing is guaranteed. You opponent's distruction is not guaranteed. If you truly believe that you can simply end the encounter in one guaranteed clean shot, as your previous posts imply, then you not practicing with a lot of noncompliant partners.

Incidentally, you completely dodged Brandon's question: what martial art do you practice?

Daniel

 

[wolfeyes2323]

"Either way, you are banking on being able to immediately kill,
render unconscious, or otherwise disable an opponent with one stroke.
You imply that this is guaranteed. Nothing is guaranteed.
You opponent's destruction is not guaranteed. If you truly believe that you
can simply end the encounter in one guaranteed clean shot, as your previous
posts imply, then you not practicing with a lot of noncompliant partners."

It is true that every outcome can not be Known or predicted ,
but , if the outcome of a martial arts technique is not successful,
the fault or weakness is not in the Art or the technique , it is in
execution of the technique or method.

I train with the intent of being successful, my survival may depend on it.

If there are multiple opponents, I have opportunity and can not even the odds,
I will most likely soon be defeated,
If my opponent is armed, I have opportunity and I can not end the threat
immediately , I will most likely be defeated
If my opponent is large and out weighs me by 50-100 lbs , I have opportunity
and I can not finish, I am most likely defeated

Everything depends on our methods being effective , If they are not, we
are practicing what to do in defeat.

If practicing forms, it is a black and white world, we do or , do not .
Our first weak method , first lapse in focus or concentration, first mistake,
first time we are distracted , any moment or movement that is not our
best, the form ends, we are defeated.

The goal of practicing anything in a martial art is to survive the practice,
we have the correct methods , we have the correct technique , we
are schooled in how to deliver, we train spirit mind and body to
forge us into a weapon, if this weapon is not effective, we are done,
it does not matter what we do next, we only postpone the inevitable
defeat.

Why is your kumite partner resisting ? Because you are mentally and physically
in the same moment and even, successful methods are similar to a chess strategy,
we prevail because we are ONE STEP AHEAD of our opponent,
we do not have to be far ahead, just a fraction, and if we do not allow our
opponent to catch-up and we do not stop moving his demise is assured or
GUARENTEED , if we stop or allow him to catch up we will end up struggling
again and may be defeated, this is then our fault and not that of the methods.

My teacher said to me, there is the law of the Jungle, the strong and powerful
defeat the small or weak, (the strong survive) , when TIGERS fight one will
die and the other be mauled and wounded, there is another way.

How can my opponent harm me , He must get ahead of me slightly,
he must beat me to the punch, close the distance before I can move ,
or something comparable to prevail I need to stay slightly ahead of his
next move, I can lead him and manipulate him, if I make him believe he can
escape I can trap him and finish him etc.

martial methods are a strategy which allows for manipulation and destruction.
of our enemies by , staying one step ahead of them and then
delivering the final stroke with irresistible timing, this concept permeates
the methods of Martial methods and Arts,

If we practice against a resisting opponent and the reactions are not already
accounted for , (we are not one step ahead of him) then we have a 50/50
chance at best of prevailing, we essentially back to a stalemate .
Now I will need to struggle and fight again until I can get another opportunity ,
this is no way to conduct your self in matters of life and death.

as for the art I practice , I did not dodge the question, it is just irrelevant ,
to the discussion, just as the art you practice is irrelevant to me,

It is the methods we use in our practice and the skills we hone,
the will determine the outcome of conflict, what we call these
methods and skills is irrelevant , what best sums up my
methods is I practice a Traditional MARTIAL ART,
and apply concepts of moral culture , because I live in a civil
society.

I do not practice a civil art of pugilism or a sport ,
although I did at one time often compete, and came from
a school with very strong kumite skills and sport karate
champions. This is no longer relevant to me, but,
I do teach kumite to my young men, just because they enjoy
challenging each other, and measuring their self against others.
We also visit non related schools in the area from time to time
to kumite with fresh faces, My students do fine at this,
but it is not used as a measure of their art or proficiency,
Yes I am proud of their abilities and accomplishments ,
but in the greater scheme of things this is all meaningless.

Romney^..^

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

as for the art I practice , I did not dodge the question, it is just irrelevant ,
to the discussion, just as the art you practice is irrelevant to me,

Then do not expect anyone to take you seriously on an internet forum. And for the record, you were dodging the question. Now you are stating that you refuse to answer.

Since you will not reveal what traditional art you practice, we have no basis for discussion.

It would be one thing if you were to say that you have developed your own style and philosophy that is influenced by past masters, but that is not what you say. You say that the traditional martial art that you practice is irrelevent to the discussion.

This is intellectually dishonest. If you claim to practice a traditional martial art on an internet forum and proceed to talk down to other posters, you should expect to disclose your art.

Daniel

 

[blindsage]

Romney you jumped into this discussion with declaritive statements on what Martial Arts is, and what kumite is, as factual statements, not as opinion. And other, long time experienced martial artists chimed in to debate with you and you simply reject out of hand anything we say. We all have different ideas and experiences with MA, your 'chinese' philosophical studies and teaching do no make your declaritive statements any more factual than anyone elses.

I have plenty of experience and have done plenty of reading on philosophy and history both east asian and otherwise and I disagree with much of what you say. I also have had discussions with MA pracitioners with much more experience and time in it than me (40-50 years) that would disagree with much of what you say. Does that make any of us right? Not necessarily, but it does lend credibility to those opinions. Coming on to a thread and preaching a philosophical perspective as 'right' and 'true' coupled with an unwillingness to consider other experienced, educated opinions is pretty much non-productive.

And I don't train not to fight. My life is about not fighting. I train so that if I have to fight I can and with an increased likelihood of survival. TMAs are often about fighting as can be seen in the profuse stories of MA icons who were known as champion fighters. You may have bought into philosophical mythology, but that doesn't make it true.

 

[blindsage]

Then do not expect anyone to take you seriously on an internet forum. And for the record, you were dodging the question. Now you are stating that you refuse to answer.

Since you will not reveal what traditional art you practice, we have no basis for discussion.

It would be one thing if you were to say that you have developed your own style and philosophy that is influenced by past masters, but that is not what you say. You say that the traditional martial art that you practice is irrelevent to the discussion.

This is intellectually dishonest. If you claim to practice a traditional martial art on an internet forum and proceed to talk down to other posters, you should expect to disclose your art.

Daniel

His profile info is public and states Okinawan Karate Sensei, and lists membership with Goju-Ryu and Isshin-Ryu organizations.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

His profile info is public and states Okinawan Karate Sensei, and lists membership with Goju-Ryu and Isshin-Ryu organizations.

Of which he may or may not be a part of.

False claims are hardly uncommon on the web.

Refusal to discuss one's TMA when directly asked usually indicates that they have either no background in it at all or not enough background in it to support being as opinionated as the poster wishes to be.

Daniel

 

[Xue Sheng]

your 'chinese' philosophical studies

As I asked before how is he linking this to China? From what I have been reading it is not Chinese Philosophy. But I have not read every last bit of Chinese Philosophy so I could have missed it and I would REALLY like to know how he is linking this to China since Okinawan Karate , Goju-Ryu and Isshin-Ryu are not Chinese