Do you practice a bastardized FMA?

Discussion in 'General' started by geezer, Jun 2, 2008.

  1. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Brit with a stick

    No, we go to war because we covet what they have or have a fear of what they may do to us and it means we go to kill them to either take from them or stop them and that at it's base involves killing them.

    No, you carry a gun to kill otherwise it is just a lump of metal which is of no use other than a loud hammer. If you want to intimidate someone just look scary...

    We send troops to kill people thier job is to kill and be killed, nothing more and nothing less.

    How far back are we going with this, it may be true now, but what about 600, 700 year ago, can you honestly say that this has always been the case? Remember many of your ancesters invaded the Philippine Islands at some point from somewhere else. Discovering somewhere is another name for invasion.

    Look at the Sri Visayan and Majapahit Empires, all invadors at some point.

    Of course not, who want's to admit being the aggressor, even an invador is doing it for the right reasons, or so they tell you, We are doing it for God, God is on our side and they are evil and we need to ride the world of evil blah blah blah! Even Hitler said to his people he was doing it for the right reasons, the Japanese done it to rid Asia of the evil western impearialists, the Romans done it to civilise the world. Truth is, they done it out of want and fear and that is the bare bones of it.

    Did not some of the Moro's constantly raid villages and other clans up and down the coast of the islands? Did not one tribe invade another in order to gain what they had or our of fear of what they may do?

    Like has been said, Warfare is Warefare be it defending or invading, fighting is fighting no matter what reason you give it, killing is killing no matter if the intention is evil or good.

    We would all love to beleive our ancesters where the brave and bold warriors with great intentions for the nation, when in truth they where fighters first, they seen what they deemed as wrong, wrong for them, or they used it as a means to gain something they wanted. They where not the good saviours of the world, just ordinary men in an extrodinary situation.

    Best regards

    Pat
     
  2. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Brit with a stick

    Let's look at the natural order of things;

    There is a tribe that amounts to 30 individuals, they live on a peice of land that can comfortably sustain 50 individuals with the natural resourses. Now 20 years down the line the tribe has grown to 100 individuals and they need to find more resourses to sustain the whole tribe.

    This will require them to venture in to other lands, other peoples lands. Pow! we have an invasion. The other people are not happy as they too are finding it hard to live on the resourses they have. Pow! we have a War.

    Now the invadors where in the right in that they where trying to ensure the survival of their tribe and their land, the defenders are in the right as they are defending their lands and their tribe.

    So who's in the wrong?

    Best regards

    Pat
     
  3. PG Michael B

    PG Michael B Oso Grande

    It was the way and in some parts of the world it is still the way. Tribe survival entails taking what is needed to continue your way. In many parts of this world tribes went to war, became aggressors against the western influx as well...i.e. the indoctrination of western ways and more so western religions (The catholic church ).

    Armies war to kill..and under that umbrella comes occupation, and a thousand other ramifications..but if you do not kill the rest will never come. I do not carry a pistol to intimidate, it is on my person for one reason, to kill if warranted....I don't want it to happen and I pray I never have to pull it. If it is pulled in defense of me or mine you can bet your last banana the bad guy will be meeting what ever God he or she may believe in.

    As to the fma groups you know of...well of course they do not kill and conquer..most are average guys who just like to workout...some may have the ability but most don't have the chutzpah needed to hurt more than a big old plate of pancit when it comes right down to it, and there is nothing wrong with that. That however does not mean that the arts in their original context were devised for killing..they were..they had to be.
     
  4. arnisador

    arnisador Active Member

    The Sayocs talk about tribal warfare a lot and I understand that they even train group-on-group methods.
     
  5. PG Michael B

    PG Michael B Oso Grande

    Tribal ways only became systems when peaceful men (do not mistake peaceful for pacifism..;)..) molded them.... With that being said, the lethality is still there, it takes the right sort of man to summon that demon. That is the beauty of these arts...they can soothe and they can maim..they can comfort or they can wreak havoc...they can heal they can kill...choose. But they never loose there ability of lethality.
     
  6. sjansen

    sjansen New Member

    Although I totally agree with what you said it reminds me of a T-shirt I owned when I was in the U.S. Marines. "Join the Marines, visit new and interesting lands, meet new and interesting people and kill them!"
     
  7. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Brit with a stick

    And the British version of that has another line tagged on to it "and catch interesting diseases".
     
  8. equilibrium

    equilibrium New Member

    A master can mix in other techniques into a system or create new techniques and make them work. A guy who thinks he is a master creates a bastardized system that doesn't work too well and is untested.

    So purity means it has been tested, perfected, proven again by new students and hasn't mixed in things that dilute it or make it work less well. As Tuhon Gaje says "it took many lives to perfect one technique."
     
  9. PG Michael B

    PG Michael B Oso Grande

    .
    Technique while necessary especially in the early stages of a new comers progress is not the heart of the over all method. Technique is limited, it is shallow pond. When students start to progress they have to come out of the box, they have to put technique on a back burner and build their expansion on principle. When one understands principle of movement then he or she will realize that technique only flows when principles of the method are ingrained, understood and felt. Sadly most students remain on a technique driven path amassing so many that their personal tool box looks more like a tinker toy set.

    Where is your proof? Have you personally spoken, trained, worked with every person who has gone their own way (as their forefathers in the arts did) if not then making such a claim is futile at best. I personally think that going your own way, touting your own work and building your own house is the right way. I tend to think like a founder, not a follower.

    In life there is nothing perfect (except for a Chris Madrids Cheddar Burger) that whole mindset doesn't hold water with me. One mans perfect is another's flaw..to each their own. All that should matter is you and how you can work and how you can pass it on, with your own expression, your own ways...to simply be a mimic isn't the key. There are far to many Chiefs and not enough damn Indians.

    Define proven..are we talking tournaments, street combat, war zone, teaching what? To say proven is vague at best.

    Hmm Mr. Jaffri please stand up
    __________________
     
  10. I take the point Mike that the majority of Masters have "Gone their own way" and created things of beauty but:

    Isn't this contradictory?

    Simon.
     
  11. kaliman1978

    kaliman1978 New Member

    I agree to a certain extent with Mike. The fundamentals of any system is to serve only as a blue print and not an end all be all to any system. When you use the term bastardized system, I think it would be accurate to say that almost all systems are basterdized to a certain extent. I mean if you look at kali, kali is supposed to be a bladed art but we use sticks as a training aide to the stick. Now with that said there are simply things that you cannot or would not do with a stick that you would do with a sword correct? I mean you wouldn't witik with a sword when you you could simply cut the neck or hand. My point is that alot of these masters did train with alot of other masters in their lifetime and adopted alot of if not some of the material that they learned from an outside source to their system while maintaining the basic foundation of what their system is about. Once you learn the basics you are supposed to develop your own style so to speak of what ever system you train in. There is no such thing as uniformity when you get to the advanced levels of any system THIS IS FMA NOT KIM'S KARATE. Everyone will have their own interpretation of what they believe what the truth is in their system. The place where everyone will look alike is in the fundamentals. If you are into trying to look like somebody else then you will be cheating yourself because only what they do works for them, they won't be the one fighting for you should you find yourself in a situation it will ony be you so don't get caught up in being a robot. Train for yourself, think for yourself, and be responsible for your own improvement in whatever system you decide to train in.
     
  12. Raul

    Raul Mananandata

    I think it was a typo, it should read as, "Join the Marines, visit new and interesting lands, meet new and interesting people and kiss them!"
     
  13. PG Michael B

    PG Michael B Oso Grande

    Beauty for them, yes...but as I always say "There is two sides of the razor" what they deem as beautiful I or you may deem as ugly. Ugly is not a bad thing..on the contrary, I deem SEAMOK as ugly but damn it is beautiful.


    To many Chiefs not enough Indians

    Yes if you look at from a topical point of view...hence the need for more Indians who will venture out on their own path. Chiefs in my opinion are those who buy into their own hype of being the Grand Poobah of the 10th degree. They thrive in the dogma of absolute. They the Chiefs believe their way should always be way for everyone else...they do not encourage their people to go out and build their own house, they would rather build an army of clones. Sad to say many of these are $$$$ driven and so it fits their agendas. This happens in all arts.
     
  14. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Brit with a stick

    Or as I like to say to all my students: "What would you rather be, the Sheep or the Shepard, because we all know where the Sheep are going in the end dont we and the Shepard is leading the way."

    I agree with you, it is our duty to encourage our students to look outside the box, try and train with different people to ensure they know what they are getting is the best for them and to help them improve themselves. Knowledge is power as they say, and if you restrict their knowledge all you end up with is a herd of dumb animals like Sheep who are all heading for the slaughter house.

    Best regards

    Pat
     
  15. Raul

    Raul Mananandata

    Yep, but you have to be inside the box before you start to look outside of the box.
     
  16. Pat OMalley

    Pat OMalley Brit with a stick

    Of course you do just like you have to learn how to walk before you can run. But keeping yourself withing the safe confines of the box will eventually hinder you espcially when the need to run arises.

    best regards

    Pat
     
  17. PG Michael B

    PG Michael B Oso Grande

    But a short stay is best..IMHO

    I throw my people into the deep end of the learning curve from day one. I push them to think and move on the fly...to trust their instincts..that nothing is wrong nothing is right..simply flow. In a world chalked full of violent possibilities it is pertinent that people become functional now..not months from now. By throwing your people into a deep end they are forced to perform. It amazes me how quickly they start to blossom.

    I have a personal credo that I go by...I want my people to be functional NOW..so every class I work on this, every class they take something they can do now if the crap splats...basic, simple and nasty. I have no desire to keep students back..to simply horde them for whatever agenda some other's may covet.

    I feel my job is to give my students the gift of empowerment...to give them the blue prints based on my experiences ( tumultuous at best)...I truly feel that is my lot in life...I was placed here to do just this...I was put through the garbage I survived so that I could teach others how to survive and thrive in such environments if the case should ever come up.

    I covet no system over another..I simply took my knowledge accumulated over my lifetime in various methodologies and built a way for simple, practical training that my people dig...It may not be for everyone...few things are, but it is my way and in being such I do my best to pass it on to those interested.
     

Share This Page