Wing Woo Gar
Grandmaster
That’s a fair assessment. I never thought about it before joining MT, it just never mattered, like ranks or uniforms.
Is BJJ a TMA?
- Thread starter isshinryuronin
- Start date
Wing Woo Gar
Grandmaster
I’m a shallow callous man, but I’ve got standards gosh darn it. You better look up Condyloma before you slide in to it.
Prince_Alarming
Master Black Belt
I was getting to that
Prince_Alarming
Master Black Belt
Oh. Oh dear.
Wing Woo Gar
Grandmaster
She brought her 1980s hair with her too.
Prince_Alarming
Master Black Belt
It kinda slays though, like her vibe
Wing Woo Gar
Grandmaster
For those that don’t know, the human papilloma virus is so small it can penetrate certain thin condoms. Nurses have contracted it in their sinuses and lungs by inhaling the smoke during surgical ablation.
Wing Woo Gar
Grandmaster
Looks like a trick or treat Halloween costume to me, or a Kit Kat commercial.
Prince_Alarming
Master Black Belt
yeesh. Behold their works, ye mighty and clean yours with bleach
I haven’t been in a dojo since the pandemic started. I have no idea how Martial Arts specifically, or in general, have changed, so take this with a grain of salt.
I trained with a lot of TMA guys. The way I used to define a TMA was the way the people that taught TMAs defined theirs to me, both in and out of their dojos.
In my own words, speaking for them- Ours is a historical Art and is taught and trained the same way it always has been. There are no additions, the Kata will remain the same and will be trained and explored in the same ways, as will the individual techniques and exercises.
A non traditional art would be added to or subtracted from, anytime a different way of training, understanding, moving or fighting was realized. Anything from MMA, a different TMA, paintball, boxing, football, modern weapons, whatever.
I trained with a lot of TMA guys. The way I used to define a TMA was the way the people that taught TMAs defined theirs to me, both in and out of their dojos.
In my own words, speaking for them- Ours is a historical Art and is taught and trained the same way it always has been. There are no additions, the Kata will remain the same and will be trained and explored in the same ways, as will the individual techniques and exercises.
A non traditional art would be added to or subtracted from, anytime a different way of training, understanding, moving or fighting was realized. Anything from MMA, a different TMA, paintball, boxing, football, modern weapons, whatever.
Yeah, that was (and still is in some places, I'm sure) the concept held by many, many TMA practitioners.
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. What they may not realize is that their teacher may have taught other people at other times differently. And their teacher's teacher probably did things differently. And their teacher's teacher's teacher almost certainly did things differently. And their teacher's teacher's teacher's teacher 100% for sure 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. (Certainly not the only marker. Just in this thread, @isshinryuronin has demonstrated his understanding of the history of change in TMAs.)
In my neck of the woods folks only call an art traditional if that specific art was developed by Asians. That's about it.
Most of the MMA BJJ and krav maga guys around here would take it as an insult to be called traditional. As the term implies a less functional art that can't stand up to aforementioned arts.
Most of the MMA BJJ and krav maga guys around here would take it as an insult to be called traditional. As the term implies a less functional art that can't stand up to aforementioned arts.
isshinryuronin
Senior Master
Thank you! Discussions with sincere and knowledgeable people (unknowledgeable is OK if sincere) has:
1. Broadened my understanding and appreciation of other arts and viewpoints.
2. Provided a forum for others to hopefully do the same of my art.
3. Provided an opportunity for me to think about and analyze issues others bring up which often give me new realizations, discoveries and perspectives of MA principles that I either hadn't had, or did have but lurked in the back of my brain and allowed them to surface as I type out a post. I love when those "aha!" moments happen.
4. Provided an outlet for my excess yang energy during the occasionally heated (but hopefully friendly and rational) debates that sometimes arise.
5. Kept me from watching endless old sit-com reruns with my wife when I'm not working out or going to doctors with her.
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
Absolutely valid points, and in my opinion, none of that necessarily disqualifies something as being Traditional. There is a tradition of training and teaching, as I said above. But change is part of that process.
Flying Crane
Sr. Grandmaster
Interesting point of view, and I realize a common one.
My take is a bit different. The established long-standing tradition of teaching an old method is because that method has withstood the test of time and proven to be effective, even in the modern age.
A new, modern method has yet to pass the test of time. Perhaps it will, perhaps it will not. That remains to be seen.
I circle back to my earlier comment: they are all just martial arts. Some are older than others. Some are very popular, others less so. Some focus on competition, others do not, and still others some of both.
isshinryuronin
Senior Master
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.
.
Yeah it's a really simplistic way of defining traditional in martial arts lol. By this definition BJJ wouldn't be traditional simply because it has Brazilian in its name.
I tend to think of traditional as being defined as simply something that has been done for several generations at least. If my grandfather did BJJ and my father, and then me, I could start to say that my family traditionally does BJJ. The screwy part is ask me if I think BJJ is a traditional martial art my knee jerk answer is no. But that just may be my bias of being raised in an area where traditional MA is thought of as Asian MA.
isshinryuronin
Senior Master
I think TMA has come to be synonymous with Asian/Oriental MA as they were the MA that was first widely introduced/popularized in the West on a large scale and were also the largest family of MA practiced. They largely share a common history, basic principles, culture and philosophy and so we naturally placed them into a single group we now called TMA.
Yes, there are other geographic areas that have their own traditional arts, but we weren't much aware of them Perhaps it's more correct to call TMA, Asian or Oriental Martial Arts, but once something is named and widely accepted, it's hard to change.
Europe also has a tradition of old combat styles, mostly weapon based: Sword, axe, dagger, etc. Though this group is not as popular, they still have come to get their own name, HEMA, and that group of fighting styles shares a general nature, history and principles different than the Oriental arts.
Other geographic areas had their own unique MA but have not been popularized and so have not "earned" their own name. Angel Cabales is credited with bringing the Philippine family of MA to the US, but that was in 1966, after TMA was already in use. But it was, IMO, Danny Innosanto that popularized it (greatly aided by his association with Bruce Lee) in the early 70's. There are various styles, but all sharing a specific geography, evolution and set of principles. So, they get their own name, FMA.
I put arts that have developed mostly in a sport environment in their own general class/es (as I do with specialized military-based combat arts/skills). Judo, while largely a sport, shares enough other criteria, IMO, for it to be TMA. BJJ also originally stemmed from a TMA but lacks enough other criteria common to other "TMA" for me to put it into that category. That's my personal take on it, but it's a fine line.
All this leads to my conclusion that TMA being associated with the Oriental arts is not "biased," but a logical and natural thing. While there are other tma's out there, the Oriental arts got the rights to the term "TMA" (like a domain name) as I outlined.
Teapot
Orange Belt
I think TMA is just an unhelpful label due to a lack of a concrete definition. Different people just have a "checklist" on what a TMA "might" have.
Here is a label that I invented that is what I think people wanted to have but didn't think of it: Skilled Trades Martial Arts (STMA).
The definition would be something like: A martial art that is taught under an apprenticeship model.
This is so much more useful because:
Many old-school Japanese martial arts (Ko-ryu) would be STMA because they may have Uchi-deshi (“Inside student”).
Chinese martial arts were "traditionally" the same way, where they also have the concept of an "inside student". Deshi is the same character as Tudi or Dizi in Chinese. Although people often use the word "disciple", I think the word "apprentice" is easier for the average person to understand.
In Chinese culture, Baishi is the process to become an "apprentice" in Chinese martial arts, as well as many other disciplines such as Traditional Chinese Medicine, certain musical instruments, tea ceremony, blacksmithing, etc...
This is why the idea of "secrets" is associated with some "TMA" because skilled trades have "trade secrets". That is true for lots of skilled trades, not just STMA.
Even in Thailand, where there's Muay Thai, it's possible (I need to be fact-checked here) that Muay Boran had an apprenticeship model? I am unsure, but their equivalent of "Baishi" seems to be called Wai khru?
Many martial arts schools today are taught to large groups instead of small, private discipleship settings. This shift parallels how education evolved, from individual tutoring (apprenticeship model) to public schools and universities (institutional model).
Example: In the past, scholars studied under a personal master (example: Plato studying under Socrates), but today, universities mass-educate thousands using structured courses. Similarly, martial arts went from closed-door discipleship to mass instruction at schools and sports clubs.
I think my invented label, STMA, is what people wished they could use but didn't think of it.
The "Tradition" in many stereotypical "TMA" is basically about apprenticeship. This tradition predates the martial arts themselves and is not unique to martial arts. Even in Medieval Europe, they had guild systems where you went through the stages of apprenticeship, then you became a journeyman, and then you could become a "master" if you made a masterpiece.
So, under my clean-cut definition, BJJ wouldn't be a "STMA" because you don't normally learn BJJ by becoming someone's apprentice.
Here is a label that I invented that is what I think people wanted to have but didn't think of it: Skilled Trades Martial Arts (STMA).
The definition would be something like: A martial art that is taught under an apprenticeship model.
This is so much more useful because:
- It categorizes martial arts based on a learning paradigm instead of a "style".
- I don't recall ever seeing McDojos/Bullshidos operating under an apprenticeship model because that is bad business.
- You can distinguish BJJ, Sanda, Muay Thai, etc... away from STMA, which TMA has failed to do, and I can tell a lot of people wanted to make that distinction but failed to do it cleanly.
- Because if I ask: "Is Muay Thai a TMA? It's an Asian Martial Art after all. It has rituals." and of course, people will be like: "No! It... can't be! Muay Thai is effective; it can't be a TMA... even though it fits my definition of TMA. Damn it!"
- Most shitty "TMA" schools just so happens to not be a STMA.
Many old-school Japanese martial arts (Ko-ryu) would be STMA because they may have Uchi-deshi (“Inside student”).
Chinese martial arts were "traditionally" the same way, where they also have the concept of an "inside student". Deshi is the same character as Tudi or Dizi in Chinese. Although people often use the word "disciple", I think the word "apprentice" is easier for the average person to understand.
In Chinese culture, Baishi is the process to become an "apprentice" in Chinese martial arts, as well as many other disciplines such as Traditional Chinese Medicine, certain musical instruments, tea ceremony, blacksmithing, etc...
This is why the idea of "secrets" is associated with some "TMA" because skilled trades have "trade secrets". That is true for lots of skilled trades, not just STMA.
Even in Thailand, where there's Muay Thai, it's possible (I need to be fact-checked here) that Muay Boran had an apprenticeship model? I am unsure, but their equivalent of "Baishi" seems to be called Wai khru?
Many martial arts schools today are taught to large groups instead of small, private discipleship settings. This shift parallels how education evolved, from individual tutoring (apprenticeship model) to public schools and universities (institutional model).
Example: In the past, scholars studied under a personal master (example: Plato studying under Socrates), but today, universities mass-educate thousands using structured courses. Similarly, martial arts went from closed-door discipleship to mass instruction at schools and sports clubs.
I think my invented label, STMA, is what people wished they could use but didn't think of it.
The "Tradition" in many stereotypical "TMA" is basically about apprenticeship. This tradition predates the martial arts themselves and is not unique to martial arts. Even in Medieval Europe, they had guild systems where you went through the stages of apprenticeship, then you became a journeyman, and then you could become a "master" if you made a masterpiece.
So, under my clean-cut definition, BJJ wouldn't be a "STMA" because you don't normally learn BJJ by becoming someone's apprentice.
Last edited:
