Whenever I hear about martial arts, there are only 3 styles mentioned which are serious:-
...
All systems are artificial and have strengths and weaknesses, as do the people who practice them. Let me offer an analogy from the world of music, which I do not claim to practice except vocally rarely, yet I do enjoy it profoundly.
Instruments = Martial Arts Systems
Musicians = Martial Artists
Shall we now rank instruments based on the skill level needed to play them? Or perhaps the sound that emanates from them? And who is to judge? The musician or the house to which he plays? In any of these cases, for example, let us pit the piano against the violin and bag pipes. Still, we cannot make a sound judgment, because the skill of the musician will figure into the equation quite prominently, as will his choice of music to play. Not only is skill involved, but also there are physical attributes that will determine who is to be better skilled. For a pianist with short, fat fingers is doomed, while the one with long, slender fingers will master that particular instrument with much more ease. Then comes preference of instrument, which may be based on such things as the music style that is preferred. Then we can also consider the construction of the instrument, which will affect the sound that is produced!
So the martial arts style(s) of practice that one choose(s) is(are) based on many things. Mastery of a system is not always a function of desire and training time; as flexibility, strength and other factors will come into play. Sex, size, power and other factors figure in as to which martial art(s) one can play (if you will). A small woman may need to train for kicking and hand techniques for disarmament. Is this contrived fighting in a ring where sex and size are pretty-well matched or is it deadly serious, to the death type of fighting against any opponent with any weapon(s) for which the training is designed? These are extremely important considerations as well. If the former ring fights, then, for example I may perform specific techniques for the ring to earn trophies and medals, yet I may lose my life in a real battle. Why? Because I may not be able to gouge your eyes out, break your knee, or smash your nuts for a trophy; and if that is all I train for, then I will not automatically go for the weaker tissues in a
real fight, because that is not what my training focus has been. The rules of engagement are as old as these (ultimately) military systems are themselves, and they do matter greatly in many respects. Also, if there is a better technique, use it (just as if there is a better brand of flute, or a different way of blowing that makes it better). Do what Bruce Lee suggested: take the best of all styles in the way that you can in the body you inhabit.
Is there a better martial art system? Is there a superior musical instrument? Based on the physics alone? I think not.
In short, it is all
somewhat subjective. It is when the musician becomes one with the instrument and becomes the beautiful song in the ears of the (optional) enraptured listener that all else dims. It is the same when mastery in the martial artforms studied becomes a natural, beautiful extension of oneself. Then there is no technique, no style, as it is a unique performance experience of oneness. Style superiority becomes a moot question.
Topic: Self-Teaching Martial Arts (Read 24042 times)