Manny
Senior Master
The diferences beetwen japanese jujusu and brazilian jujutsu? for me they are very alike but I am not a jujutsu student.
Manny
Manny
can anyone tell me....
- Thread starter Manny
- Start date
The most basic difference between traditional Japanese jujutsu and Brazilian jujutsu is that most of BJJ is floorwork, and most of Japanese jujutsu is standing. Understand that this is a very simplistic viewpoint, but it is the most basic difference.
Tanaka
Purple Belt
lol they are having this discussion on budoseek.
http://www.budoseek.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?28118-Japanese-Jiujitsu-and-BJJ
But basically Japanese Jujutsu will have traceable lineage to Japan(Feudal times). Japanese Jujutsu is still usually grappling oriented, but was based off fighting in a battlefield. This means it was a mean to fight an armed and armored opponent(or unarmed). You won't really find techniques for fighting off your back, like you do in BJJ. Because in Japanese Jujutsu ryu... The focus was getting your opponent on the ground with you kneeling or standing over them.(Basically still on your feet). You still have the chokes, joint locks, takedowns, and throws, but with a different philosophy and approach. Traditionally Jujutsu was pretty much taught alongside with weapons training. Also in a lot BJJ schools you will be trained in a sport manner. Where you will be told something is against the rules, or you won't be allowed to do a certain joint manipulation. And finally BJJ isn't really from ancient Jujutsu, it is actually Judo.
I'd say BJJ and Japanese Jujutsu are pretty different outside the chokes and joint locks.
Last edited:
Gaius Julius Caesar
Black Belt
To add to the above, you have Japanese Jujutsu both Classical and Modern as well as Japanese based jujutsu, meaning it's an American or European style with a large to middlin degree of Japanese originated techniques.
lklawson
Grandmaster
You mean BJJ is from Kano-Ryu/Kano-ha Jiu-Jitsu?
http://www.afsacademy.com/bjjhistory.htm
Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
Brazillian Jiu jitsu, is a safer art, and therefore, better for sport competition. Some of the things they teach in the Japanese stuff can be crippling (which is the point).
Sean
Sean
Is that why BJJ touts the rough and tough stuff and Judo is called "the gentle way?"
Chris Parker
Grandmaster
lklawson
Grandmaster
It's a lot muddier than that.
Kosen Judo/JuJitsu is an example of these ambiguous name applications.
Oh, and I've seen more injuries in Judo than you can shake a stick at. The competitive nature encourages "hard core" training and competing.
Peace favor your sword,
Kirk
So theres no grappling in JJJ?
Tanaka
Purple Belt
No.Is that why BJJ touts the rough and tough stuff and Judo is called "the gentle way?"
So then there will be grappling defenses? I'm talking about what you said in your post...that you wont find techs for fighting off your back.
Tanaka
Purple Belt
I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean.
In Brazillian Jiu Jitsu and Judo. There are techniques developed to where you can fight off your back when someone is on top of you. Being able to do stuff from the guard position.
But yeah of course there are grappling defenses in Japanese Jujutsu. Just none that I know of off the back while someone is on top of you.
They say a picture is worth a thousand words. The first three are Japanese Koryu (created prior to 1863) jujutsu arts. ....
Shindo Yoshin ryu
Takenouchi ryu
Hontai Yoshin ryu
Brazilian Jujutsu
Shindo Yoshin ryu
Takenouchi ryu
Hontai Yoshin ryu
Brazilian Jujutsu
Just asking, because some JJJ that I've seen has included defenses while you're on your back.
Steve
Mostly Harmless
Well, I don't know much about Japanese Jujutsu, but there seems to be some wierd ideas floating around about what BJJ is and isn't. I'd recommend that you guys read Slideyfoot's comprehensive history of BJJ. If you only read through the first few sections, it explains where BJJ came from and how it relates to its Japanese roots.
http://www.slideyfoot.com/1982/06/history-of-brazilian-jiu-jitsu-bjj.html
Edit to add that I really enjoy this particular narrative history. Slidey's writing style is conversational and accessible, not overly academic. He cites his sources and includes a lot of details often glossed over. For example, Kano's introduction to Fusen Ryu Jujutsu, the early evolution of Judo and the close ties between early Judo and the roots of BJJ. Saying that BJJ is a derivative of Judo without understanding the differences between modern Judo and Judo as it was in the early 1900's is very misleading.
http://www.slideyfoot.com/1982/06/history-of-brazilian-jiu-jitsu-bjj.html
Edit to add that I really enjoy this particular narrative history. Slidey's writing style is conversational and accessible, not overly academic. He cites his sources and includes a lot of details often glossed over. For example, Kano's introduction to Fusen Ryu Jujutsu, the early evolution of Judo and the close ties between early Judo and the roots of BJJ. Saying that BJJ is a derivative of Judo without understanding the differences between modern Judo and Judo as it was in the early 1900's is very misleading.
