The problem is that "the same way it always has been" is a myth. I'm sure many TMA instructors are honestly doing their best to teach exactly the way their teacher taught them. And their teacher's teacher probably did things differently.
Katas change over time. Techniques and training methods change over time. Training hall culture and rituals change over time. It happens more quickly in some schools than others, but it happens everywhere.
Perhaps one marker for a "TMA" is the belief in this mythology of an unbroken, unchanging tradition
Just some comments on your insightful post. I'll use karate to illustrate, but CMA has some parallels.
1st quoted point - One of (imo, the main one) karate's defining aspect is that it went thru major changes during its 300-year history. 1800, 1900, 1950 and 2000 karate was much different from each other.
Early on, changes were based on historical need as the combat requirements changed. In the early 1900's it changed as its cultural requirements changed, being introduced into the mainstream public school system. In the 1950's American GI's brought the art home and it became Americanized and commercialized, changing again to fit a new cultural environment.
2nd point - Techniques and training methods had to change as the use of karate changed over the years. Warriors to bodyguards, to LE, to public schools to commercial schools, to sport competitors all had different needs, historical and cultural.
When kata were first adopted, teaching was one on one and there were no styles. In this loose, unstructured environment the art, forms were more personalized, and masters visited and shared with each other, like a potluck dinner party. These
masters of the art did make kata changes to suit their way as nothing was written in stone then, but the intrinsic lessons contained did not change much. Post 1900, forms were changed in Japan to a less lethal and more basic version for the general public.
Post 1950, American instructors were largely just military guys with limited skills, and more importantly, limited knowledge. They usually had little contact with their teachers and no one to oversee their teaching. This resulted in some degradation as well as natural drift. So, there were two types of kata changes: informed and deliberate, and often accidental or less than ideal deliberately changed.
3rd point - There is knowledge (technical and historical) contained in tradition. Changes in tradition can cause some loss of knowledge. Tradition is also a tie to the past giving appreciation to all that came before and allows us to better understand and appreciate the present TMA. New traditions have been formed that reflect various changes in TMA culture over the years and that's natural
As for "unchanging," this is indeed a myth, as I've described. But this historical and cultural change can be said to be part of the tradition. But I don't agree "unbroken" tradition is mythological. While kata has changed, several from the 1700's still exist in recognizable, if variable, form. We can pretty well trace the general history of karate back into
old China. And I can trace my lineage, name by name,
mostly unbroken to specific masters in the 1700's. I think that's pretty cool.
.