In a recent interview, Jiu-Jitsu pioneer Relson Gracie shared an unconventional view, asserting that Jiu-Jitsu originated not in Japan but in India over 10,000 years ago. According to Gracie, Buddhist monks developed early forms of the martial art as a defense strategy while journeying between temples to spread their teachings. Facing constant threats from bandits, these unarmed monks needed ways to protect themselves.

“Jiu-Jitsu was detected 10,000 years before Christ in India,” Gracie claimed. Lacking weapons, these monks supposedly used leverage-based techniques to overcome attackers. “When bandits came, instead of using weapons, they would take them down, get on their backs, and strangle them. They could kill much faster this way.” While mainstream history places Jiu-Jitsu’s origins in Japan between the 15th and 17th centuries, Relson argues that ancient India’s grappling and martial arts practices likely influenced the art’s later development.

Relson also reflected on his father Helio Gracie’s rules, which emphasized active movement and avoided stalling. In Helio’s competitions, fighters had to maintain dominant positions actively, with only three seconds allowed after passing guard and a 30-second limit in top control positions. “In Helio Gracie’s rule, if you passed the guard, you had to hold for three seconds. And if you stayed on top, you could only stay for 30 seconds,” Relson noted. He believes that modern Jiu-Jitsu, which allows lengthy stalling, has deviated from this active approach.

Another key concern for Relson is the rise of leg locks, which he sees as impractical and dangerous. Techniques like kneebars and heel hooks, though popular in competitions, hold limited value in real self-defense. “How are you going to apply a kneebar or twist an ankle in a street fight?” he questioned. Reflecting on his father’s rules, which prohibited leg locks, Relson argues that BJJ should emphasize control and position over potentially injurious techniques, particularly for younger practitioners whose careers could be jeopardized by serious injuries.

Relson is also critical of the lack of standardized rules across Jiu-Jitsu federations. He observes, “All championships, from the ADCC to the Brazilian Nationals, have different rules,” which he believes hinders the sport’s growth and Olympic aspirations. Comparing it to judo’s globally consistent regulations, Relson feels that BJJ’s fragmented rule sets create confusion for competitors and prevent it from unifying as a global discipline. He calls for standardized rules that favor effective techniques and prioritize self-defense applications.

Gracie expressed disappointment with Jiu-Jitsu’s drift from its self-defense roots, asserting, “Today, Jiu-Jitsu has lost its original character. It’s a mess.” He suggests incorporating self-defense requirements into belt promotions, believing this shift would bridge the gap between sport and practicality. “How can an instructor not know how to disarm a knife or a gun?” he asked, emphasizing that self-defense remains central to Jiu-Jitsu’s purpose.

Ultimately, Relson Gracie advocates a return to practical, self-defense-oriented Jiu-Jitsu, unified under consistent rules that highlight effective, strategic techniques over point-focused competition moves. His vision reflects a commitment to preserving Jiu-Jitsu’s legacy while ensuring it remains relevant and practical in real-world scenarios.