Why?
" Most of the martial arts were created by monks"
There is no historical evidence for this. There was a fiction story written in the late 1800's in China which perpetuated the "Damo came to China and taught the Shaolin monks martial arts" myth. The story didn't exist before that. Shaolin had a standing militia, but so did every other land-owning organization in China at the time.
If you want hard evidence of martial arts, most of the earliest accounts actually ARE sports. The Beni Hasan tombs in Egypt record wrestling. Pankration was part of the ancient Greek Olympics, along with boxing and wrestling. Shuai Jiao and Sumo (or proto-Sumo) are some of the earliest recorded martial arts in China and Japan, respectively. Empty-hand techniques in the military were meant to supplement armed skills, not replace them; you were better off with a sword, spear, or bow than your bare hands. The more advanced techniques either came out of sports (guys who fought unarmed for a living) or when unarmed combat was no longer an every day occurrence, but the teachers still wanted to maintain their income. You think soldiers who had to be trained in land navigation, battle wound dressing, battle formations, etc. had time to learn even a quarter of the throws found in modern Judo? No, they learned a handful of techniques and hoped they'd never have to use them.
Edit: "NO MOST WUSHU INFLUENCE CAME FORM Bodhidharma WHO WAS A FROM INDIA AND ACCORDING TO INDIA HISTORY HE WAS INFLUENCE BY THE RIG VEDAS"
Back off of the caps lock, buddy. So, what evidence do you have for this? What original (contemporary) sources? Are you aware that evidence of Chinese martial arts exist that predate Bodhidharma's supposed arrival in China? Are you aware than many Chinese villages and families have local styles that have no traceable lineage to Shaolin?
Edit 2: I dunno, you say your caps is broken, but several of what you've posted is in lower case. That's inconsistent.
Also, don't cite myths. They literally mean nothing. I could cite myths that the sun comes up because the god Apollo is driving his chariot across the sky, or that the bear's tail is short because he got it caught in some ice, but that doesn't make it true. Or you could prove me wrong by finding a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.
Also, the authors of your first "citation" don't claim any contemporary documents- in other words, reliable first-hand accounts- of the creation of Chinese martial arts. They simply say that their origins "have been attributed to..." without telling us WHO is attributing them.
Look, I'm not trying to be a hard case here, but I've actually gone to school for the study of history. What you're offering isn't history, it's mythology and conjecture.
"[The myth of Shaolin] was largely created by two books. In his article, "On Politically Correct Treatment of Myths in the Chinese Martial Arts," [author and martial artist Stanley] Henning states: "The origins of this myth cannot be traced back earlier than its appearance in the popular novel, *Travels of Lao Can*, written between 1904 and 1907, and there is no indication that it was ever part of an earlier oral tradition.
"The second book that popularized the Bodhidharma-Shaolin temple myth was *Secrets of Shaolin Temple Boxing*, written in 1915 by an unknown author. In his article titled, "The Chinese Martial Arts in Historical Perspective," Henning writes of this book: "Both [Chinese martial arts historians] Tang Hao and Xu Je Dong exposed this book's lack of historicity, but... it became popularly accepted [nonetheless]....
"That is not to say that there was no training going on at the Shaolin temple.... Buddhist temples were often large landowners... as such they usually had some form of militia to guard their property. These militias were often called upon... to fight alongside, or in lieu of, the imperial Chinese army. The Shaolin temple had fighting monks who made up the militia that guarded the temple's properties and other business interests. In that regard, the Shaolin temple was no different than any other temple or town in China.
"....[T]here is no historical evidence that the Shaolin temple was a hotbed of martial arts training or development. The historical reality was more likely that most Shaolin monks learned whatever combat methods they knew from whatever time they had spent in the army or in village militias prior to becoming monks."- *Chinese Martial Arts Training Manuals: A Historical Survey* by Brian Kennedy and Elizabeth Guo, copyright 2005, North Atlantic Books, Berkeley, CA, pp 70-71.
* indicates Italics.
That guy cites multiple sources in just that small area. While I know my citation method is a bit rusty, that guy cites actual historians and doesn't rely on myths.
Actually the vast majority of martial arts trace their origins back to some mix of hybrid of fighting styles, they developed to a point of individuality that became a style of its own right but learning techniques from the enemy is the basis for every so-called 'battlefield art' which is amusing because styles that were forged on evolution have now been overrun by people who are hellbent on stagnating their style by preaching 'This and that aren't part of this style because I say so' and claiming that Mixed Martial Artists are 'reinventing the wheel' believe it or not the wheel has been reinvented several times to improve what it does, the addition of inflated rubber to provide grip would be an example. While the human anatomy hasn't changed that much the nature of fights has changed quite a bit, just knowing a martial art isn't enough to bluff your way out of a fight anymore. Media has taken all the intimidation out of styles like Wushu, Jujutsu, Karate and Taekwondo and many people who claim to be the most knowledgable in those styles are regularly being proved to have little or no fighting ability.
There's nothing wrong with practicing traditional styles just like there's nothing wrong with learning from lots of traditional styles - what is wrong is closing yourself off to the present and saying 'this is right purely because it was used on a long-gone battlefield by a long-gone civilization'.
These days the Mixed Martial Artists are often more experienced and closer to battle hardened than the 'traditionalists' also, I'd put my money on a duelist over a soldier in every area short of assassination..
Plus from a survival stand point. I'd say any empty handed fighter is dead for sure if anyone has a weapon with an intention that's strong enough to be labelled as a 'killing intention.'
I was going to answer....till I realise it'll just feed someone's imaginary keyboard pride and fantasy of how much a warrior he is to stuff full his superiority complex. Though I agree with 'Jim' I wouldn't say footballer isn't dangerous. Anyone can be dangerous. People need to become more aware that you don't need some mega high skill to cause harm to people. Being hurt by anyone is just an existing possibility. No matter if that someone is MMA or TMA, or footballer, or politician, or doctor or anyone.
I just love how KW shows all those clips KW will never admit or show who beat 4 of the Gracie's. Who was that KW wasn't it a Japanese catch wrestler named Kazushi Sakuraba also know as the Gracie Killer.
You heard me KW, Kazushi Sakuraba beat 4 of the Gracie's. So you infallible BJJ has been beaten. Royce was a corner stoppage, Ryan was a unanimous decision and the others were submission.
Hey there,
To download for free Broken Sword Return of the Templars you can click here: http://bit.ly/1uaZTPK
it's the full version, avaiable for free! very fast to install
Despite being an unofficial version, Broken Sword: The Return of the Templars got enough notoriety among the fans of the series, to the extent that their legal creators gave their full support.
im not going to read all that crap you wrote. i will straight out your history though
chinese martial arts had several influences only a small part of them have ties to the Shaolin temple,
the middle east played a pivotal roll in the development of various styles, through the trade routes going through the mountains, some were influenced by korea as well not to mention the other countries that contributed through the trading ports. and many of the villages created there own styles that have no influence from the temple as well
not that many martial arts were influenced by India, if you trace them back.
and india was influenced by africa mainly as well as some minor influences in the middle east.
keep going back you will find that there is not one single major contributor for all styles. that is just a failice
the highlight of the japanese empire had over 2000 jujutsu styles and thousands of sword styles. not all of them can be traced back to china
Apples and grapefruit.
MMA is a modern fighting sport, not a martial art. All martial technique has been removed for safety.
although people not exposed to martial art think it is, there is nothing martial about sports. Football is also violent and tough, but isn't martial art.
Kokoro gave a good answer here. KW did not.
Koga Ryu is a school of ninjutsu. (Or was for those that say the lineage has died out).
I'm not really seeing the question to be honest.
-
People forget that its "Mixed Martial Art". Most of the martial arts were created by monks, Nihung, hindu preist etc. It was created for war and defense not for sports. Some arts such as:
-Sanatan Shastar Vidiya:
- Koga Ryu
- Ninjutsu
- etc
have been banned or forgotten.
I respect MMA fighters but I still think Martial art teachers would destroy them in a real round.
HERE ARE SOME OF MANY MARTIAL ARTS AND THERE ORIGINS:
India:
-Gatka, properly known as Shastravidya, Famous by: Akbar, Akali Phula Singh, Maharaja Ranjit SIngh
--Kalaripayattu made famous by :Bodhidharma a man who heavily influence China and its martial arts
-Mardani khel made famous by Shiv Ji
-upon several more
Many of the older forms gave way to martial arts in the rest of Asia
China:
-Wushu: made famous by Bodhidharma (菩提達摩), Eight immortals (八仙), Five Elders (五祖), Fong Sai-yuk (方世玉)
Japan:
-Jujutsu
-Kenjutsu
-Battōjutsu
-Iaijutsu
Korea:
-Taekwondo
-Hapkido
and those are only a few
