Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 06:12, 16 August 2006

	Martial arts Unassessed
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Martial arts. Please use these guidelines and suggestions to help improve this article. If you think something is missing, please help us improve them!Martial artsWikipedia:WikiProject Martial artsTemplate:WikiProject Martial artsMartial arts ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.

List of archived discussions
10 December 2005–12 August 2006

Removal of objectionable portions, adding official citation and trying to keep the tone encylopedic

Thanks for the ton of help in the article itself, by way the people. Could not have done it without the excess help I had in typing and writing the article. Thanks a bunch.

Anyways, the official citation by the Shaolin and Gracie sites is available, the language will soon be turned more encyclopedic, several other sources of official nature will be cited thus ensuring greater credibility.

Thanks once again for your shaking your head in mock-panic-attack-i-disagree-with-sim-ply-everything-every-word, I get the vibe that writing in India is just 2300 years old because Rigveda is something I never heard of, horrible-horrible (the amount of comic relief really is appreciated) and trying your hand at being sarcastic about professers, countries, Madame Blavatsky and official versions, could not have done it without you I'm sure.

As usual, the panic reactions and attempts to sarcasm are awaited.Freedom skies 04:22, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

Please put down the straw man. No one is saying that India is "just 2300 years old". However,

• Not everything comes from India, whether it's martial arts, medicine or mathematics.
• Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox. So you love India and think it's great. Good for you. That tone is not appropriate for Misplaced Pages. Nor, more importantly, are false, hyperbolic and unsupported statements which reflect that sentiment.

JFD 19:02, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

still not fact

I applaud you for making an attempt at redoing the article as more "encyclopedic," however the fact remains that you are still unfortunately using one-sided sources on the internet that are not books but random websites to support your notion that various martial arts came from india. You are still not acknowleding the fact that those religious textbooks don't name any of the martial arts that are existent in india today nor do they describe in any way a form of fighting that appears to be martial arts. All they talk about is "this god-king learned archery", this "king wrestled that king..."; further, for every one random person or website that says that bodhidharma invented this or that martial arts, I can give you ten or more books written by historians, authoritative textbooks and volumes of encyclopedias including websites that say that bodhidharma is just a legend, that the first reference to bodhdiharma in any chinese textbook says that he is persian or central asian, and the only - the only reference to bodhidharma and shaolin kung fu was written by a taoist ( who disliked the Shaolin monks) in the 18th-19th century A.D. a thousand years after he ever was mentioned in any chinese textbook. Further, if you want to use the legend to support your claims, then why don't you mention the fact that all of the chinese legends state that he created stretching exercises (not martial arts) to make the monks stronger - and that he created these exercises in China after meditating in a cave for 9 years. None of the chinese legends stated that he brought it from india! you're currently making a random educated guess that since there are currently some indiginous martial arts in india today that it might have existed in India way back in the 6th century A.D. and warping the legend to state that bodhidharma instead of creating it in a cave in China in the 6th century or so (after meditating without moving for 9 years) must have brought it from india to china. Further, you don't seem to want to cite the sources of literature (and these are actual historical texts not websites) in china that state that the shaolin monks already had martial arts before the purported arrival of bodhidharma. Not only that, why do you keep on citing Alex Doss (the president of some Tamil independence movement - who is not a historian) when he says on his website that Bodhidharma (suprise suprise!) is actually Tamil! and that bodhidharma's martial arts were Tamil based! Further, why in the world are you citing a Brazilian who is not a historian who did not invent Jujutsu as to the origins of Japanese Jujutsu? While you're at it why don't you just ask Jet Li or Chuck Norris their ideas on the origins of kalaripayattu. As a result, the article's factual accuracy is open to interpretation and the neutrality of the article is open to interpretation. But once again I appreciate this dialogue. However, Freedom, you seem suprised that we would be so disagreeable to your notion. If you had been around 2-3 years before, you would have discovered that this is not the first time that this has happened. Almost every 3-4 months, some random national from some country - pakistan, the middle east, europe, and especially India seems to come onto wikipedia and decides that their country is the progenitor of this or that martial arts because he heard this or that rumor online or at home. I guess everyone is crazy for martial arts these days. This has been ongoing i believe since the beginning of the creation of wikipedia. Regardless, this is not the first time that this has happened and i guess it will not the last time. Please have an open mind Freedom. Kennethtennyson 23:14, 13 August 2006 (UTC)

I re-edited everything in the text to a more accurate interpretation of the history of indian martial arts. I removed anything that Alex Doss wrote as he is not a historian and there is nothing to substantiate anything that he has written online. I also removed what was mentioned about Gracie. He is not a historian either - just a random martial artist with his own website. Kennethtennyson 00:51, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Still no proof

You still haven't given the name of that Taoist monk who was a dissenter of the Shaolinists. Also, where are your sources (quotes from books, at least a web site)? It seems that as though what ever you say should be already official which makes you "sources exempt". I have seen many of your posting on various other martial arts forums. It looks like as though you are on some kind of campaign to discredit the fact that martial arts was introduced from India to China. Also, you still think that India we see today existed thousands of years ago, as ancient India? It's like saying there was an ancient Canada. Was there? As one person stated, of course, there was the 16 mahajanapadas (republics) of Bharat, which some people consider to be another name for India. However, these mahajanapadas basically covered as far north as Afghanistan and no further south than present day state of Maharasthra, Central India. The ancient texts you speak about such as the Mahabharata mention of these 16 North Indian kingdoms. You are correct that they do not mention about the martial arts, except for the wrestling, and archery. Basically almost every civilization had their own cavalary, infantry, archers, etc. And China indeed had a combat system just like Greece and Egpy. However, you over look the Dravidian country of Southern India which has its own ancient literature such as the Silappadikaram, and the Purunanuru amongst others. In these texts they mention of the martial arts of Southern India, or Tamilakkam as what that region was called at the time before the creation of India by the British. Silambam (Silambattam) is one of them. Another good text to look at is called the Varma Cuttiram translated from the old Tamil manuscripts into English and published by the University of Madras. I see that you have an interest in Chinese and Indian literature. However, Indian literature is basically the Sanskrit literature. Dravidian or Tamil literature has pretty much been left out of general Indian literature. It would be good if you could look into Tamil literature since there is a lot of history being left out. Especially regarding the sea contact between various cultures and the Dravidian south or Tamilakkam.

On the subject of Daruma Bodhidarma, what makes you think that he was not Tamil? Isn't Kanchipuram in Tamil Nadu? Please tell me that Kanchipuram is not in Tamil Nadu and I will believe you. I could be wrong. Wasn't Kanchipuram the Capital of the Tamil Pallavas? For your information, Buddhism was also practiced during certain time periods in Tamilakkam by the Cholas and Pallavas. Another piece of Tamil literature called "Manimekalai" written by a Chera prince named Ilango Adaigal is about a Buddhist nun. Why do you discredit Tamil martial arts or culture in general. Could it be the fact that the Tamils or Dravidians in general share a lot of commonalities with cultures from Eastern Africa and the aboriginals of Australia? Is it the fact that the Tamils believe in Lemuria? The most recent proof was the 2004 tsunami which unvieled more artifacts from the Bay of Bengal. A couple of years prior to that, scientists have conducted some underwater excavations thus revealing more structures and articfacts in the Bay. The Silappadikaram mentions of a great flood or tsunami.

Lastly, I would like to know if you have anything against Tamils or Brazilians? Here is your quote:

"he says on his website that Bodhidharma (suprise suprise!) is actually Tamil! and that bodhidharma's martial arts were Tamil based! Further, why in the world are you citing a Brazilian who is not a historian who did not invent Jujutsu as to the origins of Japanese Jujutsu?"

Is it offensive to state that Bodhidarma was a Tamil? Is it because Tamils resemble that of African decent and are not of a somewhat purer race as you might imagine, lets say the "Persians" or "Central Asians". So since, Gracie is a Brazilian, does that disqualify him as a source for Japanese Jujutso? What makes you more of a credible source of information on Indian or Chinese heritage? Do you realize that you are contradicting yourself when you state that we shouldn't quote from a Brazilian on Japanese Jujutso, while you are a non-Indian and a non-Chinese speaking on Indian or Chinese culture?

How do we all know that you are actually a Phd. scholar? You're probably just another bum off the streets of Sunset Blvd. using the library internet. I don't care if you get upset or not. A lot of racists tend to, when they get confronted with the truth...

Reply to "Still no Proof"

You still haven't given the name of that Taoist monk who was a dissenter of the Shaolinists.

The name of that Taoist monk is Zining Daoren (literally "Zining, the Taoist") and I don't think he had grievances against the Shaolin monks, just that he was following a historically common Chinese practice of attributing one's own work to a famous historical figure in order to give it authority.

Also, where are your sources (quotes from books, at least a web site)?

It's my fault that there's no quote. Kennethtennyson originally put one in, but I removed it because I didn't feel that a lengthy quotation on the Yi Jin Jing belonged on the Indian martial arts page. Here's what I removed:

Other books include Tang Hao's Investigation into Shaolin and Wudang and Matsuda Ryuchi's Historical Outline of Chinese Martial Arts. Stanley Henning has used these as sources for his English language articles. Henning is even more doubtful than Lin and Matsuda about the age of the Bodhidharma legend, which he dates to the 20th century. I quote from his article "Ignorance, Legend and Taijiquan."

On the subject of Daruma Bodhidarma, what makes you think that he was not Tamil? Isn't Kanchipuram in Tamil Nadu? Please tell me that Kanchipuram is not in Tamil Nadu and I will believe you. I could be wrong. Wasn't Kanchipuram the Capital of the Tamil Pallavas?

None of the primary sources about Bodhidharma's life—not the Record of the Buddhist Monasteries of Lo-Yang (547 CE) nor the Two Entrances (c. 600 CE) nor the Continued Biographies of Eminent Monks (645 CE) nor the Anthology of the Patriarchal Hall (952 CE) nor the Jingde Records of the Transmission of the Lamp (1004 CE)—says anything about Kanchipuram or the Pallava dynasty.

Please provide a reliable source which says that Bodhidharma was born in Kanchipuram into the Pallava dynasty.

And it's just "Bodhidharma," not "Daruma Bodhidharma". "Daruma" is short for "Bodhidharma" in Japanese ("Bodaidaruma") so when you say "Daruma Bodhidharma" it's like calling someone named "Johnathan" "John Johnathan".

Why do you discredit Tamil martial arts or culture in general.

Why do you try to take the credit for the martial arts of China and Southeast Asia?

Is it the fact that the Tamils believe in Lemuria?

According to the theory of plate tectonics, which—and I say this with the utmost confidence—is universally accepted among credible geologists, Lemuria is a physical impossibility.

Is it offensive to state that Bodhidarma was a Tamil?

No, but if you want to say so in a Misplaced Pages article, you need to cite a reliable source.

Is it because Tamils resemble that of African decent and are not of a somewhat purer race as you might imagine, lets say the "Persians" or "Central Asians".

No, it's because the oldest of the primary sources on Bodhidharma, Yang Xuanzhi's eyewitness account in the Record of the Buddhist Monasteries of Lo-yang, describes him as "a Persian Central Asian".

None of the primary sources says that Bodhidharma was Tamil. "South Indian," yes, but not specifically Tamil. What's to say that he wasn't Telugu? And, again, none of the primary sources says anything about Kanchipuram or the Pallavas. JFD 15:29, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Enough is enough

• I've cited the official versions of both the Gracie and Shaolin websites. If you have any problems with the official versions then do take it up with Shaolin and the Gracies, the fact that you'll have to live with though, is these are official versions and will be put down as such.
• The idea of "god kings" and other slurs that you incorporate in your arguments is a watse of time. Mallayuddha is a form of wrestling described in the Mahabharat and is also described in Doss's works as Mal-Yutham, it existed, Live with it.
• The Kshatriya systems will be mentioned, and their importance will not be downplayed because they were the warrior caste, like the samurai of japan had their own system of martial combat, which even till now in some areas is accesible only to the Kshatriyas of India.
• The article which the other guy wrote was disgusting, please refrain from letting the articles go down the drain as such.
• Dhalsim uses Yoga as his fighting style, Live with it. As much as it and other facts frustrate you, They're true.
• Doss's works will be cited, if you want to strip him of his posts and accomplishments, do so in court.

Misplaced Pages is not a playground for those with a frustrated sense of what they believe in, hopelessly screaming "horrible horrible" and having mock panic attacks was entertaining for awhile but enough is enough. I've been working my ass off citing official versions and historical viewpoints from professors alongwith an assortment of websites which pertain to the same view ........ and what do I get ?? People telling me that the websites are made by idiots, the prof's a fraud, they know the history of the Shaolin better than the Shaolin itself and no matter how credible the sources are they're too frustrated to accept it.

And about the tone, I did tell you it will be turned more enclyclopedic, more official citations will be mentioned and more credibility ensured. However frustrating you might feel, it'll happen and will be done credibly, Try living with it and not messing the article all up like you seem to be doing. Freedom skies 06:11, 16 August 2006 (UTC)

• Unassessed Martial arts articles