Modern Versus antiquated self defence

[jks9199]

Sometimes, reading these boards, I'm reminded of a quote attributed to Winston Churchill... that the US and England are "two countries divided by a common language." I can't help but think we could safely say the same about Australia and the US. I also think that sometimes, we don't take advantage of some of the benefits of textual communication: we can SEE exactly what someone actually said, which should make it easier to actually respond to their words, not what we believe we heard, and that we have time to double check what we thought we "heard" and make sure that we're actually answering it.

Of course, sometimes, I also wonder if messages aren't being lost in huge replies to multiple posts, where it can be kind of tricky to keep straight what was responding to what...

 

[oaktree]

Hi Chris,

I practice Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu under the main line Kondo Katsuyuki. so far for a year I am working on the Hiden Mokuroku Ikkajo I finished the standing form(Tachiai) and just starting the kneeling form(Idori) I will say that the book that the english copy that Stanley Pranin has produced is great reference however some things shown are the "public" version vs from learning from a teacher version.
I also practice Tenshin Katori Shinto ryu for about 3 months so far. Sensei told me who he first started off with in Tenshin Katori Shinto ryu, but I forgot however I do remember that he told me Kondo sensei saw him(my sensei) doing sword at Kondo sensei school in Japan and he gave my sensei a card with Otake sensei address and my sensei went to see Risuke Otake. Sensei has said Otake sensei is his sensei in the arts.

My introduction into Japanese sword happen by chance actually, I met someone who was part of the Tenshinsho Jigen ryu and he gave me his contact of his teacher. The Jigen ryu was hosting a seminar with Ueno Kaganori and invited me to come. I met Ueno Kaganori and the Tenshinsho Jigen ryu sensei both invited me to join. Ueno sensei even invited me to his dojo in Saitama when I come to Japan. I have not been able to train in Jigen ryu yet as my work schedule is a little hectic however when things open up I would like to as my sensei and the sensei of Jigen ryu are friends.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

No, I'd say that each of these senior students created their own forms of Hapkido, some of which had a greater focus on kicking, some had forms, some have ground work.

In other words, yes. As you said, "forms of hapkido." Still hapkido.

In the end, it's still all Hapkido, and all has to fit within that framework, as well as be appropriate to the aims, ideals, principles, and context(s) of Hapkido.

Yes. But context is not what I mean by inclusive/exclusive.

Sure... which is all part of natural development of a relatively new art. The changes in the early generations of other arts I know are far more dramatic, but they all still stick to the way the art is at it's core.

Agreed. But my inclusive/exclusive categorization is not about an art straying vs. staying true to itself. Within the context of an inclusive art, the art must as you say, stay true to itself, or it really becomes something else.

If part of the idea of the art is that it looks to address such needs, and therefore constantly looks to keep up to date and cover what is felt to be needed, well, that's still just an art staying true to itself.

This is essentially what I mean by an inclusive art.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Ah Chris it is always interesting chatting with you here on this forum. You are the master at breaking everything down. Like you I am in a mood and will elaborate on it following and try to remain PC.

Unfortunately over the last five or so years there has been a noticeable change in the way you post and you have repeatedly sniped at the Bujinkan. Whether a snide comment hear or a snide comment there and frankly your actually limited in knowledge in regards to the Bujinkan and Budo Taijutsu. Really well book learned but unfortunately you learned from an early pioneer who missed out on Hatsumi Sensei's teachings over the last twenty years or so. Sorry that is just the way it is. It was the same in the U.S. and when people found out how they had been manipulated and lied to they were really, really angry. (not saying your instructor did the same at all) Just that he hasn't been around. No other system's practitioner's on this board would tolerate this....

While we actually do agree on a lot of things. (yes we do based on the way you post some times)

However you are really right we don't agree on your opinions of Budo Taijutsu and how you some times go out of your way to disparage the Bujinkan right up to Hatsumi Sensei. Frankly, what bothered me was your comment that what is being taught in the Bujinkan is not effective in today's modern world. (pretty much the last straw) That itself is a ridiculous statement on your part and shows a very lack of understanding of Budo Taijutsu the principles and the ryu-ha that make it up. Why, because they can be effective and have been effective in self-defense. (I am sure you will tell me now that you did not say this or mean it) They are taught effectively by many instructors around the world in a modern self-defense context. Budo Taijutsu itself is a modern system with roots back to the ryu-ha that make it up. (you, yourself have even said this but must have forgotten that) Heck, most systems around the world have a level of modernity to them in that they have ancient origins but modern applications. (ie. they are being taught by modern people in today's modern times) Though of course a few preserve their teachings very well in a vacuum.

Over the last several years now you personally have gone out of your way to slowly discredit the Bujinkan, Budo Taijutsu and even Hatsumi on this board. One small word or two at a time. One only needs to go back and look through the posts. Why, I don't know because you attempt to teach from the ryu-ha that make it up. Or maybe it is because of how your group, your instructor is not part of the Bujinkan after what happened with your instructor. I think people need to understand that you personally have issues with the Bujinkan which was the core of your system because frankly you guy's are out of the Bujinkan. So you take a swipe at it regularly. People wonder and I am sure the owner and current moderators wonders why there are not many Bujinkan people on this board? (there used to be) Frankly they cannot call out people regularly on this board without getting into trouble. So limited truths, half truths can be posted as fact when they are not by someone who may or may not have knowledge in the area. (not saying you do not have some knowledge) Instead those same people in the Bujinkan, Genbukan and Jinenkan frequent other boards where they can get after it (ie. call someone out especially neo-ninjas with no direct link to Japan) and where someone would not post like this because it won't be tolerated.

However, this is just not a Bujinkan related thing as how many new people have also been run off. How many people have been called son in a derogatory manner. (which is very, very, very rude) How many people on this board have been told that they were wrong. (even though most of them were not they just had a different opinion) I have seen it done dozens of times! (way to many to count) This is not friendly and goes against what this board is about.

MartialTalk is a friendly board but it is hard to be friendly with someone when they go out of there way to discredit others and or let them know they are wrong for expressing their opinion. Or go around calling grown men son. Personally I think Bujinkan members and some other practitioners on this board are owed an apology! My o2........

 

[K-man]

Sometimes, reading these boards, I'm reminded of a quote attributed to William Churchill... that the US and England are "two countries divided by a common language." I can't help but think we could safely say the same about Australia and the US.

Ouch! On behalf of my Pommy mates who have become thinner on the ground over the years, could I point out that referring to their Winnie as "William" is akin to me calling that well regarded American figure "Geoffrey" Washington.

 

[Kframe]

I think brian, that while the actual as shown kata of the Bujinkan may not be modern but they are not the sole method of teaching. As you know, around here (im part of that core group in the Michigan area, they all train together) that the teachers are also responsible for teaching application out side of the kata. Just look at the videos of soke. He is not doing just simple kata, he is applying the methods in the ryu.

I feel that there is not much that is not applicable to real modern defense. I have come to appreciate the distancing of this art, and while that distance is the one we practice the most, we do practice in the other ranges as well. I am not totally sure about the step punch , but that dos not mean it does not work. I am just used to a more boxing style. There is something to be said about well placed precision strikes over a barrage of missed ones.


Brian I think you and I will agree that at current time, it is intended that as Bujinkan members(I don't remember if your still a member or not, forgive me if im wrong), we are expected to learn the classical ryu-ha material and then learn how to apply it. So far my understanding and the feeling im getting from those around me is that we practice applying the material in both the old context and the context of our modern lives and modern violence. I just don't see much that isn't or cant be used for modern self defense or violence.

I feel just because some of the arts were designed for a older context, does not mean that the material taught with in them is not able to be used for modern defense or violence.

Now ill throw out my own critique, a small one. As im being taught it, I find the various parries to be more use full then the jodan uke. I find it to slow to get into deployment vs faster striking. Now it might just be my low level of understanding and that im only at the beginner stage of learning it(learning it in a bigger more exaggerated form right now) , but I feel that right now it is just to slow.. Now im sure as I learn the move more correctly as time goes on, in a more compact form I may find my view change.

Even then the various parries we are taught I feel would be better suited to modern violence.

 

[jks9199]

Ouch! On behalf of my Pommy mates who have become thinner on the ground over the years, could I point out that referring to their Winnie as "William" is akin to me calling that well regarded American figure "Geoffrey" Washington.

My apologies. Written after a very long day... We've had a bit of weather in these parts, and it had a bit of impact on work over the last few days. I should know that it was Sir Winston Churchill.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

I think brian, that while the actual as shown kata of the Bujinkan may not be modern but they are not the sole method of teaching. As you know, around here (im part of that core group in the Michigan area, they all train together) that the teachers are also responsible for teaching application out side of the kata. Just look at the videos of soke. He is not doing just simple kata, he is applying the methods in the ryu.

I feel that there is not much that is not applicable to real modern defense. I have come to appreciate the distancing of this art, and while that distance is the one we practice the most, we do practice in the other ranges as well. I am not totally sure about the step punch , but that dos not mean it does not work. I am just used to a more boxing style. There is something to be said about well placed precision strikes over a barrage of missed ones.


Brian I think you and I will agree that at current time, it is intended that as Bujinkan members(I don't remember if your still a member or not, forgive me if im wrong), we are expected to learn the classical ryu-ha material and then learn how to apply it. So far my understanding and the feeling im getting from those around me is that we practice applying the material in both the old context and the context of our modern lives and modern violence. I just don't see much that isn't or cant be used for modern self defense or violence.

I feel just because some of the arts were designed for a older context, does not mean that the material taught with in them is not able to be used for modern defense or violence.

Now ill throw out my own critique, a small one. As im being taught it, I find the various parries to be more use full then the jodan uke. I find it to slow to get into deployment vs faster striking. Now it might just be my low level of understanding and that im only at the beginner stage of learning it(learning it in a bigger more exaggerated form right now) , but I feel that right now it is just to slow.. Now im sure as I learn the move more correctly as time goes on, in a more compact form I may find my view change.

Even then the various parries we are taught I feel would be better suited to modern violence.

Hi KFrame,

I am a Bujinkan member and while I am heavily invested in what I do in Instinctive Response Training and the FMA I will always be a Bujinkan member and have affiliation and training with my teachers and the Japanese Shihan and Sensei when I can. Budo Taijutsu is a system that is very near and dear to my heart! That is why I have an issue with anyone trying to paint it in a negative light!

With Jodan Uke your footwork, angle and distancing needs to be efficient and is best utilized against a committed attack. (ie. not a jab though it can work there as well if your timing is sharp) Once footwork, angling and distancing are efficient and timing gets worked out you will find it works really well against a committed attack.

Classical throws from Budo Taijutsu work great when modified and if someone has trained extensively and with lots of henka they will have absolutely no problem utilizing them. Even better certain throws utilized versus armor in Japans feudal past work great against certain western clothing ie. suits, winter jackets, etc. Not to mention they are fantastic in training military personnel in full combat gear and anyone wearing body armor. Very practical, very efficient and great structural alignment! Mind that some people have not seen them in there finest combative applications unless they trained in Japan or there instructor did.

I would add that we are blessed to have trained in Michigan but..... there are many fantastic Bujinkan practitioner's around the world. Many who have trained very hard and sought out the best training in Japan and or had a link with an instructor who trains in Japan. In the Bujinkan or any of the Takmatsuden arts this is very important. When I have been in Japan the level of training was fantastic and the commitment of the practitioner's there to their training was without question! Imagine the commitment to go regularly or move to Japan for training. That is some thing very special. I just had the opportunity today to make contact with a European Shihan whom I met and observed train, teach in Japan. He is without question very good at what he does! Lots of really, really good people in the Bujinkan as well as other Takamatsuden arts like the Jinekan and Genbukan. Lots of really good practitioner's there as well.

This is a big system, think really big, a grand system. There are almost no systems on earth the size of the Bujinkan that are run by one individual. Hatsumi Sensei is one of the worlds great martial practitioners. He is also probably the most video taped martial practitioner this world has ever seen. He teaches principles and that can include looking absolutely amazing and also looking average. There is always a lesson to be learned from his movement Why, because he is not afraid to show anything because he is very unique and confident in his approach! He is also a national treasure in Japan and has received some incredibly prestigious awards for his efforts to propagate Japanese martial arts.

I am glad you are enjoying your training and while I have not met your instructor (though we may have been in the same room) I personally know who taught him and he is absolutely very, very good at what he does! I had him regularly up to my Training Hall in Michigan and we of course learned initially from the same teacher during that same time frame a long time ago. That time was an amazing time with Doron Navon coming regularly as well as a slew of great practitioners. (tough hard edged guys)

Keep training and enjoy!

 

[Kframe]

Thank you Brain for the Insights! Just using my own past mma experience I can see your point about the jab it is incredibly hard to deal with. How ever that is not the same for the cross. This very thing is why we have more then just a few ways to defend a punch. One set way is not enough. I wonder though with enough practice and condensing of the form if you can get Jodan compact enough to use it on more faster striking styles. I was told a story about the way Nagato Shihan throws his in practice and that his form is so compact and fast that I can be hard to pick out the movement, yet still hit like a hammer.

Things may have to be modified, but that modification may not have to be large. Say a shift in weight, or a bend in the knee or some thing small. I Like the fact that I don't bend over to far, or in a lot of cases don't turn my back to my opponent.. I also know that, a quality trained Bujinkan member who doesn't want to be thrown, will be hard to throw. (as I found out recently.) I think in some cases, they don't need much modification, which is still that same technique, just henka!

I am starting to move away from set in stone, black and white views of this art. Thanks in large part to the discussion and teachings from my teachers. I am starting to feel that here is no black and white, nothing set in stone. It seams, at least were I am, everything can be varied in a way as to be made applicable to any marital situation. Which I feel is what, maybe is the point of this art.

Either way right or wrong, it doesn't matter. What happens when the hammer drops is up to you.

 

[KydeX]

Not being set in stone is at the core of the Bujinkan. My main instructor says Hatsumi him self has said "do everything halfway". Meaning you should'nt be so dedicated in your techniques that you can't alter it in a split second to accommodate a change in the situation. This is also the reason for doing all the henkas/variations. It will train you to be able to adapt your techniques to the situation at hand, so you always will find something that works. Not all techniques or tactics work against all adversaries. You must be able to adapt.

 

[Kframe]

Kydex I to have heard that very statement. I heard it on my second or third class. I think its funny that you heard it, in almost the exact same way as I did.

 

[Chris Parker]

Hi Chris,

I practice Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu under the main line Kondo Katsuyuki. so far for a year I am working on the Hiden Mokuroku Ikkajo I finished the standing form(Tachiai) and just starting the kneeling form(Idori) I will say that the book that the english copy that Stanley Pranin has produced is great reference however some things shown are the "public" version vs from learning from a teacher version.
I also practice Tenshin Katori Shinto ryu for about 3 months so far. Sensei told me who he first started off with in Tenshin Katori Shinto ryu, but I forgot however I do remember that he told me Kondo sensei saw him(my sensei) doing sword at Kondo sensei school in Japan and he gave my sensei a card with Otake sensei address and my sensei went to see Risuke Otake. Sensei has said Otake sensei is his sensei in the arts.

My introduction into Japanese sword happen by chance actually, I met someone who was part of the Tenshinsho Jigen ryu and he gave me his contact of his teacher. The Jigen ryu was hosting a seminar with Ueno Kaganori and invited me to come. I met Ueno Kaganori and the Tenshinsho Jigen ryu sensei both invited me to join. Ueno sensei even invited me to his dojo in Saitama when I come to Japan. I have not been able to train in Jigen ryu yet as my work schedule is a little hectic however when things open up I would like to as my sensei and the sensei of Jigen ryu are friends.

Ah, quite an interesting mix there! Very nice!

In other words, yes. As you said, "forms of hapkido." Still hapkido.

No, in other words, still no. If it all stays Hapkido, and simply has different emphasis' for different forms of Hapkido, it's still just the single art, not one art that then adds and includes from outside.

Yes. But context is not what I mean by inclusive/exclusive.

No, it isn't, and it isn't the only thing I put down either... however, if the methods that are added/developed (a higher emphasis on kicking, expanding to ground work etc) doesn't fit the context, then it stops being Hapkido in the first place.

Agreed. But my inclusive/exclusive categorization is not about an art straying vs. staying true to itself. Within the context of an inclusive art, the art must as you say, stay true to itself, or it really becomes something else.

All arts must stay true to themselves, or they cease to be that art, and become something else, whether a completely new art, or just a new version of an existing one.

This is essentially what I mean by an inclusive art.

Yeah, I got that... but I'm still not convinced that such distinctions actually exist.

 

[Chris Parker]

I'll come back to Brian's other posts, but to look at the second conversation going on here first...

I think brian, that while the actual as shown kata of the Bujinkan may not be modern but they are not the sole method of teaching. As you know, around here (im part of that core group in the Michigan area, they all train together) that the teachers are also responsible for teaching application out side of the kata. Just look at the videos of soke. He is not doing just simple kata, he is applying the methods in the ryu.

Hmm... To be honest, Kframe, this is a bit above your pay grade still, but this isn't exactly true... it can be quite a mistake to confuse training in the Bujinkan with training in the methods of the Ryu... or to mistake what Hatsumi shows as being the methods of the Ryu themselves as well. In short, kata are the primary method of teaching/training in the Ryu-ha of the Bujinkan, however henka (variations) are a more common teaching/training method of the Bujinkan itself... and there is no application outside of the kata, as the kata is very specifically the application itself. To apply methods that are found in the kata outside of the kata is to not be training the kata, but something else... and what Hatsumi shows is different again, as it is less about what is found in the Ryu, or even in the kata, but are more about exploration of the essence of martial arts as he understands it, from many decades and wide-reaching experiences across a number of arts.

I feel that there is not much that is not applicable to real modern defense.

Sojutsu, Naginatajutsu, Kusarigama, Bisento, Suwarigata (from seiza), huge numbers of the traditional kata, sword work, jutte, shinodake, shuko, and much, much more... My point is that, well, you've seen pretty much nothing of the scope of the art yet, so saying that you don't feel there's much that's not applicable to real, modern self defence might not be the most informed statement you could make. I'll put it this way: I know and am familiar with all of the kata from all of the commonly taught Ryu-ha within the Bujinkan, as well as a large number of related systems not officially taught within the auspices of the organisation, armed, unarmed, and non-combative, as well as quite a bit of the non-kata material from each as well. Additionally, our organisation has a great focus on understanding and having awareness of the realities of modern violence, which affords me access to a lot of information and insight into that side of things as well... which is where I'm coming from. When I say that the traditional material isn't suited to modern self defence, I'm not saying that as an attack or insult, but a recognition of the reality of the situation (on both sides).

I have come to appreciate the distancing of this art, and while that distance is the one we practice the most, we do practice in the other ranges as well. I am not totally sure about the step punch , but that dos not mean it does not work. I am just used to a more boxing style. There is something to be said about well placed precision strikes over a barrage of missed ones.

Okay, then, how would you describe the distancing of the art? And, when you've done that, can you contrast it with the distancing that common assaults take place from? There's a reason that the distancing is different between a modern assault, traditional Taijutsu, and boxing (as well as others)...

Brian I think you and I will agree that at current time, it is intended that as Bujinkan members(I don't remember if your still a member or not, forgive me if im wrong), we are expected to learn the classical ryu-ha material and then learn how to apply it. So far my understanding and the feeling im getting from those around me is that we practice applying the material in both the old context and the context of our modern lives and modern violence.

I don't think you're expected to learn the classical Ryu-ha material, really, unless you're interested in it... there just isn't any such dictate in the organisation, nor does Hatsumi's methodology support such an idea. To learn from it, to explore martial arts using the classical material as a starting point, that I'd agree with...

Oh, but for the record, learning the classical Ryu-ha and it's methods is learning it's application... giving a different application in a different context is not learning the Ryu-ha.

I just don't see much that isn't or cant be used for modern self defense or violence.

See above.

I feel just because some of the arts were designed for a older context, does not mean that the material taught with in them is not able to be used for modern defense or violence.

Hmm. Actually, that's exactly what it means. What it doesn't mean is that the principles and concepts/ideas there can't be adapted to modern application, but that's something else again.

Now ill throw out my own critique, a small one. As im being taught it, I find the various parries to be more use full then the jodan uke. I find it to slow to get into deployment vs faster striking. Now it might just be my low level of understanding and that im only at the beginner stage of learning it(learning it in a bigger more exaggerated form right now) , but I feel that right now it is just to slow.. Now im sure as I learn the move more correctly as time goes on, in a more compact form I may find my view change.

Even then the various parries we are taught I feel would be better suited to modern violence.

Jodan Uke simply means "High Level Receiving", and can refer to a range of different actions within the curriculum of the Bujinkan's methods... it can be a forearm deflection, a circular counter-strike (sometimes called a "knuckle block"), a gentle "checking" action, or a range of others... and even within this short list, there are a range of different ways they're done, depending on the Ryu that it's being taken from (Gyokko Ryu has a preferred method, Koto does it differently, it's quite different again for Kukishinden and so on)... so without seeing exactly what it is you're being shown as "Jodan Uke" in this instance, it's hard to say what it's best applied for, or how it should be altered for other situations. The reason that it's done differently is, well, because each of the systems has a different context itself (there is no single "Bujinkan Ryu" context)... Kukishinden's version of Jodan Uke is due to the attacks it faces... Shinden Fudo's is due to the "natural movement" ideals of the system... Takagi Yoshin is based on a closer, faster form of attack (non-battlefield, unarmoured), and so on. The "slower" versions are commonly found in systems with armoured combat at their core, so you know...

Thank you Brain for the Insights! Just using my own past mma experience I can see your point about the jab it is incredibly hard to deal with. How ever that is not the same for the cross. This very thing is why we have more then just a few ways to defend a punch. One set way is not enough. I wonder though with enough practice and condensing of the form if you can get Jodan compact enough to use it on more faster striking styles. I was told a story about the way Nagato Shihan throws his in practice and that his form is so compact and fast that I can be hard to pick out the movement, yet still hit like a hammer.

Depends on the form of Jodan Uke you're talking about when it comes to jabs... some adapt pretty nicely (small forearm deflections), others not so much. As far as Nagato's Jodan Uke still "hitting like a hammer", that's because it's not his arm doing the hitting...

Things may have to be modified, but that modification may not have to be large. Say a shift in weight, or a bend in the knee or some thing small. I Like the fact that I don't bend over to far, or in a lot of cases don't turn my back to my opponent.. I also know that, a quality trained Bujinkan member who doesn't want to be thrown, will be hard to throw. (as I found out recently.) I think in some cases, they don't need much modification, which is still that same technique, just henka!

No, it's both more and less than that... what is needed is a complete change of context... which might mean a slight change to mechanics, or a large one, or anything in between.

I am starting to move away from set in stone, black and white views of this art. Thanks in large part to the discussion and teachings from my teachers. I am starting to feel that here is no black and white, nothing set in stone. It seams, at least were I am, everything can be varied in a way as to be made applicable to any marital situation. Which I feel is what, maybe is the point of this art.

Okay.

Either way right or wrong, it doesn't matter. What happens when the hammer drops is up to you.

Well, sorta, but not necessarily. The training has to be geared towards the intended result... if it's not, there's no point saying "well, it was up to you to make it work" if it just wasn't intended to do the job you expect.

 

[Chris Parker]

I'll come back to deal with Brian's posts tomorrow.

 

[Daniel Sullivan]

No, in other words, still no. If it all stays Hapkido, and simply has different emphasis' for different forms of Hapkido, it's still just the single art, not one art that then adds and includes from outside.

No, it isn't, and it isn't the only thing I put down either... however, if the methods that are added/developed (a higher emphasis on kicking, expanding to ground work etc) doesn't fit the context, then it stops being Hapkido in the first place.

You just disagreed and then made the same point with different wording.

All arts must stay true to themselves, or they cease to be that art, and become something else, whether a completely new art, or just a new version of an existing one.

Again, you're simply repeating point that you quoted. I cannot tell from the tone of your writing if you're attempting a correction or agreeing. Please clarify.

Yeah, I got that... but I'm still not convinced that such distinctions actually exist.

Yeah, I get that. But I'm not really interested in convincing you. I shared my viewpoint. If you agree, that's nice. If you don't, that's nice too, but I don't depend upon other posters for affirmation of my viewpoint.

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Chris,

It really looks like you are trying to make the Bujinkan and Budo Taijutsu specifically into an antiquated martial art. However, that is not how Hatsumi Sensei teaches or does things. His approach is very modern and adaptable. That is actually a core strength of his teaching and why Budo Taijutsu is effective in modern times.

 

[Tony Dismukes]

Chris, I'm not necessarily disagreeing with anything you've written in this thread but I'm going to play devil's advocate by suggesting an alternate perspective.

The perspective that you have consistently voiced in this and other threads seems to be that a martial arts style is a discrete, static thing in itself - an integrated collection of principles, tactics, techniques, and training methods formed for a specific purpose in a specific historical context. From this perspective, new material brought in by an instructor which isn't tied to that original context isn't actually part of the system. From this perspective, making any significant changes to the principles or tactics of the style means that you've basically made a new style and abandoned the old one.

This is a valid perspective and useful for many purposes.

Another valid perspective is that this Platonic ideal of a martial art doesn't actually exist anywhere in reality. There are only individual human beings doing whatever it is they do at different points in their lives and choosing to call it by various names. Without those individuals, there is nothing in the real world that you can point to and say "this is Goju Ryu, this is Tai Chi."

From this perspective, you start to realize that a "style" can evolve in its techniques, principles, tactics, and training methods while still retaining the same name. It can evolve in the practice of a single practitioner over years of study. It can evolve as a series of teachers and students adapt the art to their individual needs and sensibilities. This evolution doesn't have to be linear, it can be branching in different directions - within a community of practitioners of a given "style" there may be individuals applying different principles to the "same" art. Conversely, there may be individuals who are training in essentially the same way as each other but calling their system by a different name because of political splits between teachers.

Realizing that humans are often inconsistent helps to understand why some styles are not truly integrated in their principles, tactics, techniques, and training methods. I've seen schools where the kata used one set of movement principles, sparring used a different set, and the "self-defense" techniques used still another. Being descriptive rather than prescriptive, I'm not going to claim that these people aren't practicing a real style (or that they're practicing 3 styles under one name). People do what they do and they can call it what they like.

To put all this in concrete terms, I'll look at my current primary art, BJJ. Putting aside Gracie family spin as much as possible, here's my current understanding of BJJ history:

BJJ started in the 1920's with Carlos Gracie, who had a foundation of only around 3 years of judo training. In the ensuing decades, the Gracie family (especially Carlos's brother Helio) and their students developed the art into something uniquely their own. The primary crucible for this development was fighting. Specifically, it was fighting (for the most part) unarmed, one-on-one challenge matches in a culture heavily influenced by concepts of honor and machismo. In this context, Gracie Jiu-Jitsu practitioners fought thousands of fights in the ring, in the streets, in dojos, and on beaches. Most of these fights were against non-jiu jitsu practitioners (either street fighters or exponents of other martial arts). A large part of these would fall into the category of "social" violence for status and dominance. Rules were largely informal and socially enforced. (If we're fighting and your friends jump in to help you, then my brothers will jump in on my side. If you bite or eye-gouge me, then I'll get a dominant position and bite and eye-gouge you back.)

From this experience, the Gracie family developed an art with a coherent set of principles (relaxation, leverage, patience), tactics (control the distance, clinch, takedown, finish with ne-waza, staying safe from strikes all the time), techniques (originally from judo, but refined from experience, with more techniques added over time from other sources), and training methods (heavy on the sparring) for a specific context (challenge fighting in the macho Brazilian culture).

Even at this time, however, there was more to the art. The Gracie curriculum included a number of self-defense* techniques for dealing with unarmed and armed assaults in a non-challenge setting. Though not as well documented as the challenge matches, we have anecdotal testimony that these techniques were used successfully on a number of occasions. These used the same physical principles as the rest of the curriculum, but did not necessarily rely on the same tactical doctrines as were used for challenge matches. Strikes were part of the art. (Helio Gracie won one match by knocking out his opponent with a side kick.) In addition, over time a number of high-level practitioners started viewing jiu-jitsu as a vehicle for developing moral character.

*(By self-defense in this context I mean just the physical methods for dealing with an assault, not the larger study of avoiding the assault in the first place.)

In 1967, sport BJJ competition was introduced with rules and a point system. Originally the points were intended to reward actions that would be effective in a real fight. Over time, competitors began focusing on tactics that were effective within the confines of the rules without regard to combat effectiveness. As more and more practitioners began preparing for competition, many of them began neglecting major aspects of the art such as throws, striking, and striking defense. Instead they devoted that time and energy into perfecting increasingly sophisticated grappling maneuvers which are effective under the rules of the sport, but questionable for real fighting.

At the start of the modern MMA era, BJJ practitioners were able to win fights by using the classic Gracie jiu-jitsu tactical doctrine - control the distance and then get the clinch and takedown without ever having to engage in the striking range. Over time opponents learned and grew adept at distance management, takedown defense, and regaining the feet after a takedown. Nowadays that doctrine has been largely abandoned in high-level competition. MMA fighters train to handle all ranges and regard BJJ as something to use only while on the ground. (This approach is not limited to MMA competitors. I've had at least one high-level BJJ black belt tell me that he would never choose to go to the ground in a real fight - but that if someone takes him down they have a surprise waiting for them. Mind you, that individual is highly skilled at stand-up methods.)

This is turning into a long essay, so I'll omit details about methods from other arts which have migrated into BJJ and the adaption of BJJ methods for law-enforcement.

So all that said, what is BJJ? What is its purpose and context? What are its tactical doctrines?

Is it a complete method for fighting challenge bouts?
Is it a complete method for physical self-defense?
Is it a sport with a specific rule-set?
Is it a component in a larger set of skills for MMA or self-defense?
Is it a fun way to exercise?
Is it a vehicle for personal self-improvement?

My answer is that it can be any and all of these, depending on who is practicing it. I teach my beginners class largely from a self-defense standpoint (including some basics of avoidance and escape), but I try to lay the foundation for students who want to explore the rest of the art. I practice myself primarily for enjoyment and self-improvement, but I'm exploring the sport aspect for the sake of grasping the art as a whole.

I suspect that you could examine a lot of arts meaningfully from this sort of perspective.

 

[MJS]

I think I'm just in this mood... this might be interesting....



Sure, agreed.

Ok.

Yeah... the Bujinkan's an odd beast... it's kinda trying to allow itself to be be whatever the person is looking for without dictating too much... which can lead to a lot of identity confusion... but I'll deal with that a bit later.

I guess, to be a bit more clear, my point was kind of along the lines of Brian's post. Unless someone is training JUST for historical purposes, and IF the Bujinkan isn't for SD, then why train in it? Personally, I think that the majority of the arts out there, were designed for SD. Its the watered down crap that we see today, that sucks as SD.

Honestly, that's because the term is often applied without understanding of the actual meaning... many think that they train "realistically", or "hard" (and they may well do), and think that's the same thing... it's not.

IMHO, I think that those guys who train in those systems, most likely do train hard, realistically, and also cover the non physical things, ie: avoiding a situation before it happens, talking your way out, etc.

As for not going into things, well... we'll see how the rest of this post turns out...

Ok.

Thing is, I'm not looking at instructors, I'm looking at the Bujinkan, and what it teaches (and how)... not quite the same thing.

On the flip side, we all know that the Buj does not have a standard set of things to teach for each rank. I believe the Genbukan and jinenkan are much more structured in what's taught for each kyu/dan grade.

 

[MJS]

So damn what? How does them being "hard edged guys" mean that throwing techniques designed to take advantage of armour, targeting specifically to fight against armour, archaic weaponry, distancing concepts not matching modern violence, use of seiza and other postural concepts from another culture and time are all suddenly actually suited to modern situations in a completely different culture altogether? There was no mention of people not being able to use anything, there was comment on how things are taught and what the make up of the system is. No doubt was ever given for "toughness" of any practitioner at all. Seriously, get over this persecution complex... otherwise, I'm more than happy to actually start with genuine critiques and criticisms, so you do have something to complain about... but realize that they will all be backed up and illustrated quite completely (not that I'd expect to change the mind of any "true believers" out there... if it hasn't happened yet, it's not likely to now).

So Chris, wouldn't this mean then, that things should change with the times, despite culture? Are people running around Japan with armor at this current time? I doubt it, no more than they are doing that here. Adapt, modify, adjust, to the current times.