Hapkido Q&A's

[Master Todd Miller]

Does the subtlety stem from the amount of time given to perfect techniques or would it be based upon the natural talents of the individual?

The subtlety comes from much correct practice. An important detail that I tell my students is understand the key point of a technique and then after much practice you will develope an understanding of the technique but more important you will have an understanding of the priciple wich is much more important.

Take care


www.millersmudo.com

 

[glad2bhere]

The technique most definitely proceeds from consistent practice that focuses on accuracy and detail. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[iron_ox]

Hello all,

I have been thinking about this seperation that we are making and I fear that it is very artificial. There is only Hapkido. The difference is in how and to what degree techniques are excecuted. In a wierd nutshell, here is how I see it:

If you need some glue, you head to the hardware store. There, you might find two glues that are made by the same company, come in essentially the same package, and cost the same. The difference is that one says it holds 10lbs. the other says it holds 1000lbs. Now, which will you buy? I would opt for the 1000lbs., it will hold 10lbs., plus so much more.

Here is how I seperate these techniques or techniques levels. One level (the 10 lbs.) works with deceptions in the dojang on a semi-compliant opponent, the other level (1000 lbs) works on a fully resistant opponent using true body mechanics.

Now, for those of you that think that real confrontations do not involve fully resistant opponents, well I'd say stop beating up guys that are sleeping...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Kevin:

I really liked your metaphor and I would bet 3M probably didn't mind either.


Yes, its true that to some degree an arguement can be made that drawing a line between yu sool and hapkiyusool is somewhat artificial. On the other hand there IS a difference albeit subtle and hard to identify in many ways. I would bet the historians who traced the development of Aikido through Ueyshibas' career probably had the same problem characterizing his major stages of development. We could go on and on about how one kind of practice is a refinement or an improvement or a refocusing or a ?????? but I just like to view it as an alternative. For many years I have heard people report that they had gotten just so far in their Hapkido arts and then had to turn to some other art to continue to progress in some way. The current approach seems to be to take on ground-fighting (IE. Tu-de, BJJ, NHB) and try to integrate that material with their Hapkido. I suppose that is still an option. For myself, I like the fact that I can move on to another level of challenge within the Hapkido arts themselves. This espeically important to me in that the mission identified by the four tenents of the Yon Mu Kwan (Training, Research, Integrity and Service) are readily served by staying within the Hapkido arts rather than stepping outside of them. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[SmellyMonkey]

I thought about posting this in a new thread, but since this topic is related I guess I'll post it here.

To my surprise, my master Mi Jung Jang has a relationship with Han Jae JI. He was in Chicago a week or two ago for a seminar and he went to dinner with Mi Jung Jang. I think they are working out plans for Han Jae JI to do some seminars at my school in the future.

I don't know much about Han Jae JI besides the interview I read in Tedeschi's big old book on Hapkido and forum members' posts. But I think I will have the chance to meet with him during his future visits to Chicago.

What do you all think would be interesting topics to discuss with Han Jae JI? I don't want to sound like a moron, nor do I want to bring up topics that are too "sensitive".

Thanks,
Jeremy

 

[Disco]

Jeremy, good question and really smart on your part to ask it. Perhaps asking his opinion on if he feels there are specific levels of Hapkido. Much like part of the discussion here. On a more generalized note, you may want to ask him about his role in Bruce Lee's movie. The name escapes me at the moment, but it was the one where he (Lee) had to fight his way up the 5 levels of the building. Good fight scene between Ji and Lee.

 

[SmellyMonkey]

Jeremy, good question and really smart on your part to ask it. Perhaps asking his opinion on if he feels there are specific levels of Hapkido. Much like part of the discussion here. On a more generalized note, you may want to ask him about his role in Bruce Lee's movie. The name escapes me at the moment, but it was the one where he (Lee) had to fight his way up the 5 levels of the building. Good fight scene between Ji and Lee.

Movie name was "Game of Death", I believe. They had cut Ji's scene from the original movie. But it was shown on the History channel this summer when they did a show about Bruce Lee. It was pretty cool!

I was rooting for Ji. Alas, he lost to Bruce. ;-)

 

[iron_ox]

Hello Jeremy,

An easy way to approach any interview is to find stuff in print attibuted to the person you are going to meet. Try to get copies of the articles, read them then ask questions that might better help you understand what issues that person was covering in THAT interview. Always a good way to start, and helps avoid taboo subjects...

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor

 

[American HKD]

Dear Jeremy,

As a student of Doju Ji's, I can tell you just be sincere he can tell right away.
Also he likes serious students who train hard that's the best way to get his respect.

In the beginng he wont talk to you that much meaning one on one but once he starts to know you and see what your all about, he becomes very approachable.

He will talk about Bruce Lee when he meets a new group for the first time or he'll say whens he's teaching a tech. this I did in the Bruce Lee movie or something like that.

Take advantage of the opportunity when you can it's a great expirience.

 

[glad2bhere]

Regardless of how much work a person puts into developing a trusting relationship, there remains the opportunity to present an intelligent question to a person who is arguably one of the major figures in Hapkido history and the Hapkido community. That said, were I in such a position, I would like to hear his views on the nature of succession as it is practiced both in modern Hapkido arts as well as traditionally in Korean martial science. Certainly he must know that succession has been a painful area of controversy in the KMA for many years. Likewise I am sure he is familiar with some of the comments made at the same time as his interview a while back. Perhaps he might provide some guidance, as a senior KMA personage regarding how he would like to see such matters handled in the future. Thoughts? Comments?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[greendragon]

Having attended the training at Mike McCarty's excellent dojang last May. We had quite a few days over some hardcore training and plenty of meals to actually ask GM Ji some of these questions. I specifically remember him telling a few of us that when he passes away he doesn't want anyone to succeed him in Hapkido. He told us that we should get together and train hard and be happy just like we were doing then. He said that the training was all that should matter.

He said that the biggest problem in Korea was that everyone wanted to be the head or in charge of something instead of just wanting to work hard and train. He said that when he trained people in Korea they were always concerned with having to work out with someone that was there junior, etc. etc. too much worrying about protocal and he thought they missed the point of just learning, training, and having fun with their Hapkido. He told us that once we learned his Hapkido we should make it our Hapkido and then we were good to go. I heard him tell me this information directly and I did not hear any of this through anyone else...so the stuff that was written in the tkd times article isn't what he has in mind for Hapkido, he said that the brotherhood of Hapkido we have developed is how modern Hapkido should be. regardless of anyone's opinion of him he is a great man and I am a much better person for having spent some serious quality time with him over the years...
Michael Tomlinson

 

[SmellyMonkey]

Thank you all for great advice.

too much worrying about protocal and he thought they missed the point of just learning, training, and having fun with their Hapkido. He told us that once we learned his Hapkido we should make it our Hapkido and then we were good to go.

I heard master Mi Jung Jang speak the same words many times. She says she mainly cares about teaching a technique until you "feel" it. Once you can "feel" the technique, it is your technique. You then change the form in small ways to make it work better for your body.

I like that concept.

 

[glad2bhere]

Thanks, Michael.

DJN Jis' response is completely in keeping with the traditional approach to Korean martial tradition. Its really too bad that approach has been so badly eclipsed by the more commercial need for having someone in charge. To read the history of kwan organizations its very plain that the "leadership" was not necessarily in a single person or small group of people in whom power resided. Rather, a group essentially accepted that there was a single person, or small group of people whom people looked to to help keep the kwan on track towards whatever goal and method was espoused by the group. I remember Todd Miller (or was it Kevin Sogor?) who mentioned that at the Taegu kwan of DJN Lim the upper ranking individuals interacted as a collective to accomplish training among the lower ranks. If there was any talk of someone being "senior" to another that must have been worked out among themselves rather than divulged to the general knowledge of the kwan. I have to say that during my short stay in Korea this year there was little (if any) talk of rank or standing. It wasn't until I got back to the States or when I got back on one of these Nets that people were making a big thing about who was in charge and who "ranked" whom. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[greendragon]

You know that when you here the high ups like GM Ji, and those like him tell you not to put anyone in charge but just get together as friends and learn and practice then you just become that much more enamored with the art. GM Ji vehemently stated this to us, there was Mike McCarty-Conn. Todd Deninger-Colorado, Sean Bradley-Washington, Javier Agosto and me-Florida, and a few others that he was directing this to and we all got it. He just wants people to love Hapkido and practice hard. Every time I have trained with him he is adament about stating that he also wants his Hapkido to become your Hapkido.
Michael Tomlinson

 

[iron_ox]

Hello Bruce,

Could you please elaborate on the KMA tradition that believes that systems be turned over to a non-cohesive group instead of a single individual? Never heard of that before.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Kevin:

Its actually simpler to start out and go the opposite way as far as explanations go. There has never been a tradition of patrilinear succession in the Korean martial tradition--- period. Until the eradication of the Civil Service exam in the 1800-s martial training was for all intents and purposes a cottage industry in which folks were taught material as a function of monastery security, sport or competition (in the sense of Taek Kyon or earlier as Soo Bahk), or local (community) security. Commoners were drilled as conscripts against internal strife. People who sought positions of responsibility based on their martial skills could apply to the Civil exams or hopefully inherit a titled position as a member of the Yangban. There simply is no case of a Korean tradition of a father passing the title to leadership of an art to his son or other relative. Yes, I know people make a BIG thing of it now and gawd how I wish they didn't but unfortunately thats life in the KMA. The closest one come to anything like this are the kwans ("frats") of which a number of folks got together to share a common interest in something. Usually a person "mentored" the group and thats about as close to the Japanese Ryu-ha system the Koreans ever got. That doesn't mean that people didn't later-on see the commercial benefit of being the single person in charge, but that gets into a whole other ballgame. BTW: See Palais' CONFUCIAN STATECRAFT (ISBN: 0-295-97455-9
or
SOURCES OF KOREAN CIVILIZATION by Lee (Vol 1&2-ISBN: 0-231-07912-5). Good stuff. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[iron_ox]

Hello Bruce,

I will have to dig up those works, but what do they have at all to say about genuine martial traditions that exist today? As I understand, Tae Kyon is a revived thing that died out long ago - as for the vast majority of Korean martial arts today, their roots are Japanese (not generations ago - but from the 1930's and 1940's).

I think that it is a little suspect to ascribe "Confucian" tradition to martial systems that never had any or from whose founders never created these traditions.

ALL current Korean martial arts run on a simple hierarchy system - even the current vision of Tae Kyon - the "Confucian" model you are looking for is non-existant in KMA of 2004. You practice an art bound up with Japanese tradition - maybe not what you want to hear, but trying to add philosophies to the mix that are simply not there may be very confusing to many. That is not to say that Hapkido is not uniquely Korean - and Confucianisam is a larger part of Korean heritage - just not a model in the same terms as you describe.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sogor

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Kevin:

I know we have disagreed about this in the past and I can imagine we continue to agree to disagree for a good while to come.

Traditions such a Taek Kyon were not and are not dead. They never died out. This is a huge amount of dung propagated by the modernists who wanted to be THE folks to shepard the nature of Korean Martial Tradition after WW II. Korean archery is another tradition that goes back for generations. Korean Ssireum has endured through generations as well. What I see is that the Neo-Confucianists were identified as holding martial matters in distain. The Japanese came along and added insult to injury by pressing a case for Japanese traditions. Modernists coming back to Korea after WW II pressed their own hybrids (with them in authority, of course) while discounting both the original Japanese AND Korean traditions.

The single greatest contributing factor to this was that the Koreans did NOT have a tradition of succession. With such a "casual" approach to martial traditions it was easy for the Japanese and the Modernists to simply say that Korean martial tradition died out. There are still Japanese nationalists and Japophiles who preach this stuff every chance they get. The Koreans have traditions of grappling, sword, archery, Buddhism, Pottery, metalurgy, Politics, Education etc etc etc. The Korean people did not have to have someone else come along and tell them how to run their government, or schools or use a sword or make a vase. What I see happening is that only a very small group of afficianadoes are taking the time to find and protect these traditions. Most folks would rather take a more commonly found tradition and represent it AS Korean. Not only is this misrepresentation but it also detracts from further investigation into the genuine traditions.

If I may, I would also like to point out the manner in which you are approaching this subject.

"......I think that it is a little suspect to ascribe "Confucian" tradition to martial systems that never had any or from whose founders never created these traditions....."

By virtue of the way you are framing the subject you are presupposing that there was sonme identifiable "founder" some single authentic origin from which the art proceeds. This is very much a Ruy-Ha sort of approach to the subject and is simply not a part of Korean tradition. Rather it is an institution started by modernists to funnel revenues one way or another. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[iron_ox]

Hello Bruce,

In Hapkido, there is a single founder, Choi, Yong Sul. NO one prior was doing this stuff, and he is the only real human among the monks and maternal grandparents that actually existed...

As for other Korean Martial arts, cannot speak to those...


Sicerely,

Kevin Sogor

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Kevin:

I think we both know where this discussion goes. It will come down to how "hapkido" is defined and by whom. We can talk about who was the first person to use the term. We can talk about the nature of Soo Bahk. We can talk about the relationship among Choi and his students, or those students and THEIR students. Choi brought traditions from Japan to Korea. What about the folks who brought Chinese traditions to Korea during the 1700-s and 1800-s? How about the folks who brought monastic tradition to Korea before that? And what about the Sa Do Musool traditions before that? Rock throwing as an art and as a celebrated festival was practiced and recorded up until about 1905. Koreans have consistently been top finishers in archery for generations. Various polearms have been recorded for several hundred years as the mainstay of Korean military as has both archery and the sword. So exactly what Korean traditions are we speaking of? I have no problem whatsoever putting Choi Yong Sul at the top of a pyramid. I just want to make sure that pyramid is very accurately identified and is positioned correctly relative to the much greater Korean MA spectrum, yes?

Best Wishes,

Bruce