What is your definition of "traditional" martial arts?

Question

when I think of tradition I think of someone who studies only one style, that involves kata and point tournaments. Some one who trains as there "style" requires you to. Not exploring any other Non-tradition like mma or eclectic systems.
What do you consider "traditional" martial art. What is your definition?

Answer 1

Traditional styles are those that teach a way to live, not just a way to fight. That teach when not to fight as well as how to fight. All traditional styles emphasize forms.

Answer 2

My two cents' worth on this is:
In the beginning, there was no traditional martial arts, there was just the martial arts, period. Then as more people began to practice it, more schools popped up to meet the demand, and as with all things that have more demand than supply, opportunists began to show up and ride on the bandwagon to make lots of money. So to differentiate themselves from the rest, schools began emphasizing their style's pedigree, from how many generations it has existed, down to the elaborate ancient rituals of their ancestors. The more resilient of these schools that have stood the test of time and created a wide following soon after became known as the traditional martial arts, while any art that has neither an ancient pedigree nor ancient customs and practice is usually referred to as modern martial arts or self defense systems. So, if 100 years from now, someone still practices MMA and wears spandex trunks instead of the common state of the art battle suits in the future fight arena and yells "let's get it on!" before a match like the MMA fighters of the past allegedly used to do (at least according to their MMA Grandmaster), then MMA could very well be called a traditional martial arts in that future.

Answer 3

Generally when I hear the term "traditional martial art," I think of an established style (mostly Oriental) that's been around for at least several centuries-- like karate, wing chun, hapkido, shaolin kungfu, wushu, etc. They typically use kata.

And I'm sure there were competitions; there are several stories of martial artists fighting each other-- either in a friendly match ("Let's have some fun") or a showdown ("my style is superior") or a deathmatch ("I must defend my family honor"). Whatever the context, those old-style competitions were probably nothing like what we have today-- whether they be point-sparring tournaments, UFC, or street fighting.

In addition, I believe traditional martial arts were orginially founded for self-defense and fighting. But over time, other focuses became attached, such as physical fitness, spiritual development, and demonstration.

Answer 4

I honestly haven't given much thought to what one really is, I just kind of go with the flow on what it tends to mean when someone refers to it. I think it has come to mean any martial art meant for fighting that is not a sportative martial art.

Which technically is incorrect as I would be hard pressed to make an argument that muai thai is not a traditional martial art. It has a history.

Same for boxing. How is an art that goes back over a century in its present form anything but traditional?

I think that NO art should be traditional except obsolete arts that aren't practiced anymore as technology has surpassed them and people study them for thier historical importance or desire (aka: swordsmanship and similar weapons). Although they should be improving so I'm not sure they should be traditional either.

What I think im trying to say through all the babble and brainstorming is that I think NO martial art should be "traditional" or label themselves as such.

Traditions belong in art and music where mozart has the same or greater value played the way it was as that is meant to be pleasing and gain pleasure from it, there is no "opponent" just a goal to make pleasing sounds, pictures etc. I think the closest thing to compare martial arts to is a computer, do you want yesterday's obsolete model, or today's modern comp.

yes, yesterday's model might be able to word process, but can it handle the internet and be as quick?

My point is that I think ALL arts even those typically thought of as traditional should be evolving and improving based on what else is going on. If people are groundfighting today then they need to learn ways that WORK to defend a takedown, maybe incorporate a sprawl or sprawl-like thing in thier system.

As much as I might **** on promoters of "anti-grappling" because it is still a concept that people push that doesn't work- and I think the title doesn't make logical sense, at least they have made an effort to try to modernize their art.

I think the term "traditional" should be an insult as it implies that your art is not evolving to meet modern day situations.

Answer 5

A martial art dated to a time when guns were not prevalent and fighting with weapons and barehands was a way of survival, protection, and war. You train students, because they will at some point, be in a position to defend your loved ones.

Let's put it this way...if you take all the guns away and everyone is relying on their hands and weapons for protection. The traditional martial arts will be very relevant.

If you go to war with 100 people against another army of 100 people, traditional martial arts will be very relevant. It's learning that aspect of martial art.

You can study multiple traditional martial art, and mix it with a modern martial art. For example, Karate, Tai Chi and Brazilian Jujitsu. It will make you a better fighter.

Answer 6

Point tournaments are not Traditional Martial Arts. The whole Point tournament idea was developed here in the States in the 60s!.... When they trined in Okinawa, Karate students trained in full contact kumite. Kumite is not the same as Sparring.
Traditional martial arts has contact, Kata, Hojo Undo like Makiwara (Or Wooden Dummies and Wall Bags) Nigiri, and traditional Kumite, not this game of tag they play at tournaments today.

Answer 7

I think you said it. Bruce Lee described it as the "Classical Mess." Bruce certainly railed against it.

Like I said, your definition is for the most part correct. Tradition includes the culture of the Art form too; it's history, founders and practices. Nothing wrong with that.

But the question you raise starts one down a road separating Art forms from Tradition for Tradition sake, from other Art forms that practice their Art for different reasons.

I think the most important understanding to take away from the whole discussion, is this: Each Art form can be more or less divided into three categories. 1) Sport 2) Self-Defense 3) Fighting.

Traditional MA usually have a sport component to them. Self-Defense & Fighting they are usually weak in. This was by design however. Their origins date to a time of War. After the war was over, a more passive system was devised to keep the Art alive, for many reasons. However, as a general rule, we judge the person and how they train, not their style, as a rule. The reason they are weak is, by practicing a sport, or a watered down version for safety reasons of what their art once was, creates bad habits (negative transfer) regarding actual self-defense and or say another sport or art. An example is driving a car in this country vs. say Ireland. All your training has been driving on the right side, In Ireland they drive on the other side. This creates negative transfer of info and very hard to override. Another example is Training for Judo and then entering a TKD tournement.good luck with that!
Their are Traditional MA styles that claim to teach the "original" art form warriors once learned; however, even if that were so, they would lack the cultural influence of today's modern world

Fighting arts are usually weak in tradition; they are usually sport too (MMA) (UFC). They, like the traditional, are also weak in self-defense as a rule if they train as a sport, being trained to ignore techniques and positions that are useful in defending in a real self-defense situation. Much like wrestling, MMA fighters are well conditioned, for the most part, but are limited, as are wrestlers, to rules of the game. Fighters may also lack the moral and legal aspects of self-defense and or the cultural significance and values imparted by traditional MA, or they may not. Certainly, fighting without rules, for fighting sake, is more like human Cock fighting, blood sport, and not a higher level of human development at all.

Self-defense arts are usually non-traditional art forms such as the pressure points and control tactics (PPCT) that law enforcement uses. They shy away from sport/ tradition because sports & watered down versions train bad habits for real self-defense. They employ more situational trainings in order to practice the techniques in the proper context (Lauer) Good self-defense Art forms inform the student of State Statutes regarding self-defense, case law as well, use of force continuums, reasonable force issues, etc....

Each Art form has their place. The training for each is different however. I think the problem that most Martial artists have is that they all see their art as self-defense. This is far from the truth. Like I said, the training is different for each.


Traditionalist, I think with the movement of the MMA, have accepted their role, some dabbling in sport, but most, focusing on the traditions of the art, not self-defense. I'm sure their are still some that would disagree, but for the most part in the general public's view, the UFC settled that question, although not the same as Self-defense, the public knows not the difference, and so Traditional art forms conformed to opinion.

It is all a matter of degree. For me, I've done all three, hold belts in all three, and appreciate all three. But having done them all, I see how much each prepares a student for each endeavor, and unless you want to spend 30 years in MA like I have, I would decide what is important for me as a student, Sport contests?, Being a fighter?, Self-defense? Tradition and the Chinese or Japanese culture?

The road to understanding the origins of the MA is a long tale. It involves an ever changing, specialization, of the same techniques based on many variables throughout history. It continues to this very day.

Answer 8

Bowing to your instructor.
Bowing before you enter the studio, and or mat.

Answer 9

self defens i gust