Martial Morals

Is there a method for teaching morals and ethics laid out in the lesson plan for martial arts?

no.

martial arts teaches you how to attack and defend. I mean, it is martial arts and not an ethics class which is mostly scenarios and events and no wrong answer solutions to those.

in martial arts, there is and will always be a wrong answer to a given scenario or event.

What boxer is qualified to teach morals and ethics? Is this not something that is better served in an environment designed to serve the need? A family? a School? A religious entity?

There is room for it and I believe it is often expressed in the oath or statement of how to behave that is usually pinned to teh wall and that’s all ya need really imo.

you know, things like: I promise not to show this stuff to just anybody because i feel like showing off or to make the promise not to use it on others who are unable to defend themselves and also to promise to use it for others who are unable to defend themsleves and so on.

but to try and mix kicking and punching with scripture for the sake of it is folly in my opinion. it serves neither end with any efficacy.

I agree with David. Well said.

But you do know George Foreman is an ordained minister, right? :wink:

[QUOTE=1bad65;830072]I agree with David. Well said.

But you do know George Foreman is an ordained minister, right? ;)[/QUOTE]

for a small fee…:stuck_out_tongue:

http://openordination.org/?s=adw&key=ordain&gclid=CMCu6-7Yy5ACFQNCgwod1iw7Ww

nothing to do with ma.

10 commandments for christians.

right speech, right act, right thoughts etc for buddhist.

what goes around comes around.

reap what you sow.

karma.

middle of the road for confusicious people.

in harmony with other people, and everything in the world for daoists.

all of the above for me.

:D:)

People choose to be good or they don’t. Nobody can impose it from the outside.

People have free will. Martial arts won’t teach anyone to be good or bad if the person in question doesn’t want to hear it. What does a person value? If they want to be a good person, then no matter what they do, it will eventually lead to that goal if the spirit is right. If a person is on the fence, they at least have to lift a finger to find out why, for themselves, being one way or the other is to their ultimate benefit.

A traditional teaching system that teaches something that has the ability to protect a good person, or a person who thinks that they want to be good, east or west, has arbitrary (or not) character requirements in place for disciplinary purposes - to flunk out the time wasters. The misunderstanding of that arbitrariness is where the common resistance to requirements of morality comes in. “Morality” is abused by people in authority as a means of social control all the time, indeed most of the time. That is why Lao Tzu told his students to put away “morality.” If someone has chosen to be good already, insisting on their “morality” is painting sneakers on a snake.

[QUOTE=David Jamieson;830058]Is there a method for teaching morals and ethics laid out in the lesson plan for martial arts?

no.

martial arts teaches you how to attack and defend. I mean, it is martial arts and not an ethics class which is mostly scenarios and events and no wrong answer solutions to those.

in martial arts, there is and will always be a wrong answer to a given scenario or event.

What boxer is qualified to teach morals and ethics? Is this not something that is better served in an environment designed to serve the need? A family? a School? A religious entity?

There is room for it and I believe it is often expressed in the oath or statement of how to behave that is usually pinned to teh wall and that’s all ya need really imo.

you know, things like: I promise not to show this stuff to just anybody because i feel like showing off or to make the promise not to use it on others who are unable to defend themselves and also to promise to use it for others who are unable to defend themsleves and so on.

but to try and mix kicking and punching with scripture for the sake of it is folly in my opinion. it serves neither end with any efficacy.[/QUOTE]

I believe Kung Fu, similar to Yoga, belongs to the mystical path. If we look at the first limb of Yoga - Yama (restrain or abstinence) - there are five principles that pretty universally beneficial to any discipline. Non stealing, Non violence/lethal force, Non substance abuse, Celibacy, and Truthfulness, these principles are all important to provide a good start for the mind-body continuum to transcend the mundane phyiscal plane, where actions without the presence of a higher conciousness are often meaningless, to a higher plane.

Martial sports is somewhat of a difficult case. It all depends on the coach IMHO. My point is that there are clear lesson plans that includes ethics and morality in martial arts. It doesn’t has to be elaborate. The problem is whether these plan are implimented and enforced by the teacher.

Warm regards

Mantis108

at a higher level of Kung Fu understanding.

  1. skills of hands and legs or .

true we practice our hands and legs to have skills.

  1. development of one’s courage.

however, not to use it in vain or

  1. most important of all is that we understand how to assess the timing and conditions/posturing of everything in life including fighting.

learn how to evaluate conditions of things, such as timing, odds etc in a fight and life in general or

and how to be in harmony with the heaven, people and earth. or tian di ren san he .

study and practice of ma is not only about one and two, but most important the level 3.

morals would be in the three harmony part.

:slight_smile:

Hi SPJ,

This one for you:

<><><><><><><><><><><><>

()()()()()()()()()()()
()()() ()()()

Mantis108

to actually “have” kungfu, generally includes a personification of uprightness…at least in my opinion, that’s what kungfu is.

but to have and reach for kungfu is a lot more than getting good at martial arts, although that is part of it.

however, your path to kungfu, and my path to kungfu are likely different, but same. :stuck_out_tongue:

stupid zen! :mad: :smiley:

[QUOTE=B-Rad;829608]In other words, that’s when it started being pushed by the government in their martial arts programs and became a more formal aspect of TCMA. Before that, everything was more clannish and gang like (more about family loyalty rather than having any universal code of wu de). I couldn’t say if it’s true or not, but I think that’s what he’s referring to.[/QUOTE]

yes its what I am getting at.

ok shaolin, wudang, like most temples in the past had protectors which were usually the monks there. shaolin was famous for its staff work, wu dang its sword. shaolin also became the basis for many legends and lineages. as for the specific martial art being taoist or buddhist, that was never taught like that in the past. thats one of the modern changes to Martial arts, its like asking a hunter if his rifle is catholic or protestant. I am not saying that is a bad thing, but it is relativly new concept.

most of the morals we see in kung fu movies were based of confucism i believe. i dont study it but the chinese seem to like it a lot.

movies are where we get a big perception of martial arts and how they acted. goes for in USA and CHINA. where in fact movies are movies.

i’m not saying all martial artists didnt have morals, there were many that did. many that didnt.

martial artists in the past were soldiers, bodygaurds, etc, people with no money. (like i said it was looked down upon.). it wasn’t looked upon very highly to be one. not until mid to late qing era did that change. most martial artists were soldiers, officers in army, street performers, or bodygaurds, if they didnt have other skills that let them advance.

martial arts was used for killing and protection back in the day. yeah it was to become strong, but if you went to a village, most of the people working the fields had good muscle to them already from their various works. in the cites people were weaker.

sorry if this doesnt fit into your world of “all martial artists were probably like wong fie hung and the “good guys” in the movie 5 deadly venoms.”

samurais (sp?) read confucious cause they apreaciated art and stuff too. midevil japan and china are 2 different places. martial arts in china were often poor, this goes back to what i sadi earlier. they couldnt read or write the morals of confucious (not until late qing era and the republic did they start teaching reading and writing), only people with money could learn to read. of course they had the basic morals I am sure.

even the gu in five deadly venoms were really bad guys. they were all after the money for their own personal use anyway.

Qoh 1

I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit.

take it outside godboy, this ain’t some jesus camp! :stuck_out_tongue:

[QUOTE=the Preacher;830803]Qoh 1

I have seen all the works that are done under the sun; and, behold, all is vanity and vexation of spirit.[/QUOTE]

You say that as if it is a bad thing :smiley:

[QUOTE=sanjuro_ronin;830051]Pretty much every MA school has a code of conduct, many are even written into the grading certificates.
This is a “new invention” of the 20th century.[/QUOTE]

I think that was what I was referring to as ‘Club Conduct’.

The ‘Martial Code of Conduct’ (Mo Duk) I’m talking of is not a modern invention, as far as I know. It is something that has been in place for a length of time.

On the subject of Morality, I believe the codes speak more of individual ‘responsibility’ to the arts ancestors and how to ‘teach & study’ in peace. Obviously this requires a certain disciplined attitude towards others…

we have discussed this before.

essentially, wu de/ mo duk stems from confucian (kung fu tze) principles/ethics.

the shaolin version is similar but has more ch’an(zen) flavour to it as opposed to absolutes with the exception of the absolute “do not kill. for all life is sacred”.

[QUOTE=mantis108;830326]Hi SPJ,

This one for you:

<><><><><><><><><><><><>

()()()()()()()()()()()
()()() ()()()

Mantis108[/QUOTE]

this is an outstanding post.

:slight_smile:

Sorry to disagree here, but Mo Duk comes from Military IMO.

The Military does not study Confucist principles until they return home! Obviously Ch’an versions will have elements of Buddhism too which will vary from Wudang (Taoist) schools also.

What I would like to ‘hear’ or ‘see’ is someone present a jpeg or something that highlights these rules or codes of conduct. These principles ‘must’ be written down, especially the Ch’an versions IMO.

So, please someone show something that we can discuss in depth, if that is the intention of this thread…

[QUOTE=LoneTiger108;831008]I think that was what I was referring to as ‘Club Conduct’.

The ‘Martial Code of Conduct’ (Mo Duk) I’m talking of is not a modern invention, as far as I know. It is something that has been in place for a length of time.

On the subject of Morality, I believe the codes speak more of individual ‘responsibility’ to the arts ancestors and how to ‘teach & study’ in peace. Obviously this requires a certain disciplined attitude towards others…[/QUOTE]

there is no morality in destruction and taking away lives.

geneva convention after wwi, no poison gas, no chemical weapon, no torturing and fair treatment of prisoner of war???

some cultural background.

  1. during the spring and autumn and warring periods, there were wars upon wars in China, people were professional soldiers such as Sun Wu or Sun Zi, it is a profession, yes, they were bound by loyalty and being just etc etc. there were certain conduct codes already. bin jia or profession of military was highly looked up to.

  2. in song dynasty, since the first emperor of song was from a general, he purposely took away the ranks of the generals that helped him to the throne, so nobody may be risen up to be an emperor just like him. being a fighter or a soldier was looked down upon purposely since then. that was why song was pacifying strong neighbors with golds and concessions. Song was the weakest dynasty in Chinese history as far as dealing with neighboring tribes and kingdoms.

  3. civilian secret societies and codes were most prominent in Ming’s first emperor Zhu Yuan Zhang. that was how he defeated mongolians.

  4. Su lu tang wroted books and introduced philosophies into practice of tai chi, xing yi and ba gua. the practice of MA would be part of character building and understanding of one’s health and relation to others and the world.

the fighting people were always bound by certain rules.

good or bad, even robbers from the mountains or robbers on horse, they would have certain rules.

passing a school or style, or even just entering dicipleship, the potential students will be evaluated on character first, if worthy, then moving forward, if not, he or she will be dismissed.

in short, there were and still are rules, as long as there are more than one people, we have to have some rules to go by or governing–

In terms of warfare, “rules” started to be used when the objectives of war started to get destroyed in battle, what good is invading and occupying a country when the people you will tax are dead and their crops destroyed?

Even raping and pilaging becmae “legislated” by superiours, at least the smart ones did.

It had very little to do with morals and ethics and more to do with self interests.