Where the heII are books or paper that show rule for "true martial artists"?

Question

I keep hear people expecially those like Xin Yao, JIM R, and few others preach about how they're true martial artist.

I would like to know where I can find guideline or rule book to show what a person have to do to be consider as "true martial artist"?

From this question: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Akex2HwpticTEytbvEsyCJPsy6IX?qid=20070123002152AAfj5fb

In the end, all martial arts are consider to be a form of hands to hands combat no matter how you look at it.

Martial artist mean someone who study way of hands to hands/weapons combat. So if someone claim person who study way of fighting aren't true martial arts then is that basically saying martial arts is something else and not a way of hands to hands combat?

I would like to see rule book or whatever that a "true martial artist" are suppose to follow.

I bet it doesn't exist and those who claim they're true martial arts and others aren't probably are trying to start their own cult.

Answer 1

Ninedemons,
There are many people out there who preach about knowing the "way" of martial arts ,yet don't even know what the words mean.
I will try to rectify their incompetent ravings by stating the facts.
Fact #1 - Martial arts means war or fighting arts.
Fact #2 - A martial artist is one who practices the above mentioned war or fighting arts.
Fact #3 - Meditation, life philosophy, and pacifistic reactions to violence were added to the martial arts , they are not inherantly part of the arts. These ways of "thinking" came from philosophers and religious persons , and have been indoctrinated into many of the arts.
Fact #4 - Not all martial arts follow the same phillosophical or moral doctrines.

So as to those who would state that their way of thinking is the only way of thinking, they have gotten lost on the "way" to enlightenment. Thats just my opinion .

Also if JIM R were to insult my teacher, my art, and myself personally as he did to you, I don't know if I would be as polite in my response .

Answer 2

I read somewhere that there are REAL no-rules fights held in different parts of the world (currently or in the past). There were no restrictions like there are in MMA fights. I guess the only rule was one quit someway. Anyway, the point being, is that in the Real no-rules fights it was said that most of them ended standing up, with a poke to the eyes. That is quite a difference than the give and take of most MMA fights. Another good point is observing fouls committed in a MMA fight. Every once in a while you will see a fighter (purposely or not) commit a foul on another fighter. It may be a kick to a downed figher, a kick to the groin, an eye poke, strikes to the back of the head, whatever it may be. The fouls usually bring devestating effects to the MMA fighters. Their ability to fight is usually severly weakened once these fouls are committed on them. So, MMA fighers have a big weakness in this area. But, how good are these internal fighters? I've read of Tai Chi practioners winning no-rules fights. I am not sure how the other internal arts rate in terms of fighting. I guess Tai Chi had quite a fearsome reputation back in the old days (before it became the health fad we know it as today). An internal M.A. fighter would also, logically, be an older person. It takes time to master the subtleties of the internal martial arts. He probably would be at least 30 y/o. He may be realistically more like his 50's. It probably wouldn't be a big factor but is a thought. A MMA figher, that is in his prime, is more in his 30's. If everything else was mainly equal, weight, height, and so on, both masters of their paricular discipline, it would be an interesting fight to witness. I would probably guess the internal martial artist would probably win. If he was trained properly (not the health fad tai chi) and there were no rules he probably would have the advantage. The MMA figter is way to used to fighting with rules. If someone was good enough they can exploit this. It doesn only take one or a few "foul" techniques to takes some one down and out. I think the internal martial artists could take advantage of this weakness and beat a MMA figher. In a MMA fight the internal figher would probably be soundly beaten by the MMA figther. But, the rules make the difference. MMA isn't the greatest, unbeatable fighting style in the world. It has those glaring weaknesses if someone is good enough to exploit them. As far as an internal stylist against other martial arts....With all the combat sports like MMA I would say they could win by exploited the weakensses of fouls. With the other arts that are no-rules I'm not sure. It may come down more to the practioner than the art. The internal/chi advantages I am not sure. I have nenver experienced someone that was an internal martial artists that had strong chi. So, I don't know how much of an advantage it truely is. You hear the stories but you wonder how much is truth and fiction. I think as a kung-fu stylist they have practical advantages over combat sports and several other martial arts. If someone is trained properly in kung-fu styles (not watered down) they have an advantage over most. They fight "dirty," fluid, quick, to the point, at close range. They are very good.

Answer 3

There are several, but obviously, if you do not prescribe to the actual system to which the laws or lists of ethics dictate, it wouldn't mean much to you.

Personally, I follow the guidelines as described by Jing Woo Athletic Association which was laid out in the early 1900's by Hua Yuen Ja. It was originated mainly due to martial artists beating each other up for no reason other than sport or pride. In fact, Jet Li's "Fearless" is about his life (with many liberties, of course)...

Many Japanese systems follow the rules of Bushido, which are similar guidelines.

I know you like to get a rise out of people ninedemons, but if you are asking this question seriously and not in a sarcastic manner, I will draw an analogy for you: think of martial arts as religions.
Jews have the Old Testament, Christians have the Old and New Testaments, Muslims have the Koran, Buddhists have several writings, etc. but they essentially derive the same end result.

Then you have atheists and agnostics who live life, but do not follow any rules or doctrines.

What's the difference? We are all living life, just some find more fulfillment in doing so than others.

Answer 4

There are many books out there that outline war and all the philosophies that go with it.
Personally I have found The Art of War by Sun Tzu the most useful of all those I have read. (Even though it lacks the guidlines you are looking for.)
And people are right , rigid countries like Japan had an entire honor system outlining the rules of a warrior.

Personally I try to look at the whole thing with a modern mind.

I tend to judge things with my own eyes before making a decision on whether or not styles, training methods and so on are "true" to the spirit of martial arts.

But I know what is NOT indicative of true martial arts:
-McDojo
-Plastic Trophies
-Being concerned with rank to the point of buying it
-a million thousand stripes and patches for every little thing you accomplish
- zero-contact training methods
-training only when you are at class

Answer 5

ninedemonsgod,
Once again you show how flexible you are.
You manage so often to put your foot in your mouth,...........
(sometimes both at once)
The book you "sarcastically" are asking about
has been written in many forms, but is easiest to find in the
"verbal" teachings from the best of instructors & Masters.
A "true" Martial Artist has only to look in his heart.
The "rule book" as you "disrespectfully" refer it is based on:
Ethics,Integrity,Character,
Honesty,Respect,and the defense
of others that are less able to defend themselves.

The reason you are having such a problem
grasping this is obvious from your questions and answers.
It appears you lack:
1) Ethics
2) Integrity
3)Character
4)Honesty
5)Respect

You are not alone,there are more & more of "your kind" in
today's world.
You have proven yourself,here,in these pages to
be a "Sarcastic, Disrespectful,Wise-cracking,
Jerk"..... who
lacks ethics,integrity,character, & knowledge.
The problem is clear,"very" clear to the older
Martial Artist reading this.Back in the day a person such as
yourself would not be able to find a school to accept you as a student! A few minutes (very few) into the interview you
would be shown the door.
The problem is "your Instructor"
The very fact that you have to ask such a question is a "Big
Red Flag" as to the instruction you are recieving.
In today's world "many",I am sad to say,will
take "ANY" student just to keep the money comming in.

Your instructor is not a true Martial Artist
If he was he would have never enrolled a person like yourself
as a student in the first place.
The other "obvious" point is you are asking a question about "the basic tenents" of Martial Arts that are taught in the first classes you attend! (in a good school)
In my many years I have met "many" Martial Artist
and fighters,a number of them "World Title Holders".
(check my previous answers for a list)One thing I learned as a
"teenager" is: All Martial Artist are fighters, & few fighters
follow the tenents of Martial Arts.
Do you remember your answer to this question
I asked in the past?
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArPM3n8uAxzH3R_tnh1rxVTsy6IX?qid=20060719210941AA1eR2a

These words are over one thousand years old and are deserving of respect.
Your remark was straight out of the gutter.
A place I am now sure you consider home.

http://www.usmaf.org/info/ethics.htm

This was an easy find.You forgot to include the word
"Ethics" in your search.Same as in your life it seems.

Answer 6

i dont know about jim.r but you only have to read 2or 3 of bin sao's answers to know he wouldn't know excreta from clay.i think he gets his ma knowledge from a video game.don't get your knckers in a knot about a loser like that.he raves on about parkwhores that should tell you straight away he's not even worth responding to.thats the difference between a martial artist and some one that trains ,a ma lives the life of a ma it's a life style choice.some one who trains just trains and moves on for whatever reason.and when it comes to fighters it's like i told you before it doesnt mean there any different it just means there taking a different road to get to the same goal.ultimately most ma fighters get the fighting stuff out of their system and become very good ma.experience comes from life,acts,mistakes,youth,stupidity,fighting etc.etc etc.everyone goes there at some stage.these things are what makes a martial artist and a bit more obviously.but at the end of the day where still all heading towards the same place.anyone can learn the physical side.experience is something you can't teach,but experience is avery good thing for a teacher to have whether it be through fighting in a ring on the street or whatever.and i'm getting of the track here,my point to you is don't worry about it your reading to much into it,im sure when you get a bit of age and experience you'll see things a bit different.thats a good idea i'm going to start my own cult.i'm the only bloke and all my disciples have to nubile 18 year old honeys.clothes are banned and they all have to call me god!hahahalol.mate you know who's opinion is worth anything here dont let these ppl get to you.the real ma respect you whatever road you take to get the same goal.
EDIT.just for the record i'd rather have someone like you or stg or mktd (theres a few others on here)than a lot of the so called experts on here.

Answer 7

Now that is one hell of a good question!

True martial arts are different for every martial artist. You are going to have as many definitions of "true martial artists" as you are going to have martial artists.

I tend to be guilty of this one, but I try to call myself a "traditionalist". There IS a different between a sports martial artist and a "traditionalist".

Ok, what makes a true martial artist to me:

1) they LIVE the martial arts in every aspect of their lives. They do not just take off the blackbelt as they leave the Dojo/Dojang/Daguan but they take that teaching out into the rest of their lives. That does not mean they live in a monestary. It just means that the martial arts affect their lives... en entiris. It becomes as much a spirituality and philosphy as a figthing style.

2) they are not bullies because someone who has internalized the martial arts does not need to bully others to prove himself. I say this because those who need to bully have a lacking within themselves. True martial arts would fill that lacking.

I am certain I could come up with a better answer were it not 4 in the morning and I am falling asleep.

Those two I listed are the two main components of a "true martial artist" to me. Even those two I listed might not fall under the category of "true martial artist" to the next guy. I do not have the right to dictate to said "next guy" that his or her opinion is incorrect.

If you define martial artist as someone who is trained in hand-to-hand combat, you are opening a huge can of worms. If you limit this to Oriental style hand-to-had combat, you narrow the field some.

You could say that a "true martial artist" is only one who has been trained by a monestary-trained Grandmaster. I am lucky to be one who HAS been trained by a monestary-trained Grandmaster. I also was trained by an Irish Master later in my training who I consider to be a true Master. They were two very different men. I was also trained by a Third Dan who I considered to be a true martial artist, by MY criteria or I would not have trained under him.

I am most interested in the answers to this question.

Personally, I do not think it can be answered.

Answer 8

Actually, the word "martial art" is a translation of the Chinese characters "Wu Shu" (pronounced "Mu Sool" in Korean and "Bu Jutsu" in Japanese). "Wu" means "war", and "Shu" means "technique" or "method." So, when one refers to "martial arts", one is referring to ways of killing enemies on a battlefield. In ancient times, this would mainly consist of sword, spear, and archery techniques with some knowledge of hand-to-hand combat as a last resort. In modern terms, any system of training with firearms, especially with the military, would be a martial art.
Confusion sets in because no generally accepted, separate English term exists for another, separate practice of "martial ways" (Chin. "Wu Dao," Kor. "Mu Do," Jap. "Bu Do"). These are more modern systems developed after firearms rendered most of the older weapons obsolete on the battlefield. They tend to specialize in empty-handed combat, and are regarded as good for "building character." Most so-called martial arts schools today actually teach martial ways--karate-do, tae kwon do, judo, kendo, modern wushu, etc.
Although there is no absolute guideline as to what constitutes a "true martial artist," the above historical and linguistic information should help separate the wheat from the chaff, as it were.

Answer 9

although its a Japanese word "bushido" sums it up.
its about being dedicated, living simple,and being honorable.

the difference between a student and a martial artist is this:
a student does it for recreation and for fun.learns and tries to perfect the art but not himself.
the martial artist learns and keeps learning with a beginers mind
and does it because he is devoted to all aspects of it and searches to learn even more.

Answer 10

IMO: A "true martial art" is one that incorporates a life philosophy and emphasizes mastering your inner self rather than one that just teaches you "how to fight."

In a "true martial art" the form is a "means unto an end", not an end unto itself.