ChungDoKwan: Spelling, history, meaning, symbolism of forms

TheTraveleress

White Belt
Joined
May 11, 2023
Messages
14
Reaction score
5
Hi All:

I am preparing some documents for teaching with the advanced ranks below and beside me and I am struggling to find history, spelling, meaning on some of the forms because the are unique to our practice OR are very old and from the early days from the Chinese martial arts... I found a lot on Taebek and keumgang becuase they are still widely practiced. I am still working on Chulgi but would appreciate any assistance. I have found nothing on Yombi accept a reference to EnPi from karate.

I am specifically looking for information on (may be spelled wrong):

Yom-bi -- I have nothing

Dahli hung ee chung-- (I know as kicking form number 2, spelling is a guess)

Chulgi --I have found "iron horse" but would appreciate any other knowledge of the form

I have a deep interest in the history and preserving the knowledge of taekwondo origins, meanings, symbolism etc along with the practice of the art I have been taught all my life. If you have books or other resources I can search I would appreciate it, can be hard for the ones I dont know how to spell! Also, personal knowledge from your training or history, I can credit the appropriate Dan if provided, when presenting my research to the students.

Much Appreciated
 

skribs

Grandmaster
Joined
Nov 14, 2013
Messages
7,237
Reaction score
2,390
Regarding spelling, the Korean alphabet and English alphabet aren't exactly a 1:1 match, so sometimes words gets translated differently. For example, there are some letters that can translate as g or k, b or p, [half the alphabet] or t. Then there's the vowels, which aren't consistent enough in English to really have a good translation.

For example, let's look at the basic command "attention" that most people have probably heard and used in Korean martial arts. It can be spelled...
  • Chah-ryut
  • Charyut
  • Chari-yut
  • Charyeot
  • Charyot
You can also just use a similar-sounding English word: Chariot.

None of these are really incorrect, because the correct spelling is 麆刺. People have done their best to tell English-speakers what this is supposed to sound like when spoken in English. But I'm assuming there are different accents in Korean. I know there are many different ways of writing the same sound in English. So it's just a mess of best efforts.
 

J. Pickard

Purple Belt
Joined
Jun 8, 2020
Messages
355
Reaction score
332
Hi All:

I am preparing some documents for teaching with the advanced ranks below and beside me and I am struggling to find history, spelling, meaning on some of the forms because the are unique to our practice OR are very old and from the early days from the Chinese martial arts... I found a lot on Taebek and keumgang becuase they are still widely practiced. I am still working on Chulgi but would appreciate any assistance. I have found nothing on Yombi accept a reference to EnPi from karate.

I am specifically looking for information on (may be spelled wrong):

Yom-bi -- I have nothing

Dahli hung ee chung-- (I know as kicking form number 2, spelling is a guess)

Chulgi --I have found "iron horse" but would appreciate any other knowledge of the form

I have a deep interest in the history and preserving the knowledge of taekwondo origins, meanings, symbolism etc along with the practice of the art I have been taught all my life. If you have books or other resources I can search I would appreciate it, can be hard for the ones I dont know how to spell! Also, personal knowledge from your training or history, I can credit the appropriate Dan if provided, when presenting my research to the students.

Much Appreciated
Eumbi is a common spelling. In the 1970s the schools that still practice this form tended to adopt the chinese names in favor of the Japanes. Eumbi/empi became Wanshu, Chulgi became Naihanchi, palsek became passai. The dalye hyung was created specifically by the Sell's mostly for tournament purposes. Dalye (Dali/Dari) is literally the korean word for "leg" and Hyung is the korean pronounciation of the Japanese kanji for "Kata" and just means "form"

If you want information on these forms as far as etymology and symbolism, with the exception of the dalye hyung, your best bet is to look at the Japanese/okinawan versions (empi, tekki) since they are literally just karate kata that were adopted in the early days of TKD and TSD>
 
OP
T

TheTraveleress

White Belt
Joined
May 11, 2023
Messages
14
Reaction score
5
Eumbi is a common spelling. In the 1970s the schools that still practice this form tended to adopt the chinese names in favor of the Japanes. Eumbi/empi became Wanshu, Chulgi became Naihanchi, palsek became passai. The dalye hyung was created specifically by the Sell's mostly for tournament purposes. Dalye (Dali/Dari) is literally the korean word for "leg" and Hyung is the korean pronounciation of the Japanese kanji for "Kata" and just means "form"

If you want information on these forms as far as etymology and symbolism, with the exception of the dalye hyung, your best bet is to look at the Japanese/okinawan versions (empi, tekki) since they are literally just karate kata that were adopted in the early days of TKD and TSD>
That makes sense, the head of our association trained under Sells so they would have passed to us from there too. Both the dalye hyung forms I know are in addition to the required forms at the ranks they are taught to students. Part of our branch heritage. Very cool. Thank you so much for sharing. Do you know who Sells trained under? I have seen many associations have tree showing their TKD lineage through instructors. I am a history buff and find this very interesting.
 

J. Pickard

Purple Belt
Joined
Jun 8, 2020
Messages
355
Reaction score
332
That makes sense, the head of our association trained under Sells so they would have passed to us from there too. Both the dalye hyung forms I know are in addition to the required forms at the ranks they are taught to students. Part of our branch heritage. Very cool. Thank you so much for sharing. Do you know who Sells trained under? I have seen many associations have tree showing their TKD lineage through instructors. I am a history buff and find this very interesting.
The late Edward B Sell, trained under Uhm Woon-kyu and Park He-man back when Chung Do Kwan schools in Korea were still doing the old karate kata which is why it's pretty common for American branches of CDK that have any sort of connection to him to still do the old karate kata (hyung) in addition to Kukkiwon poomsae. The current head of their branch of CDK is his wife Brenda J Sell who I believe got her initial ranking through Ed Sell and Kukkiwon and later trained with GM Park to get Grandmaster ranks from Kukkiwon. Further lineage, Uhm trained directly under Lee Won-kuk (the founder of CDK) who trained directly with Gichin and Gigo Funakoshi who are the founder and founder's son (respectively) of Shotokan karate. This is the same Lineage as the Oh Do kwan and what would become the ITF as General Choi was a student of Lee as well.
 
OP
T

TheTraveleress

White Belt
Joined
May 11, 2023
Messages
14
Reaction score
5
The late Edward B Sell, trained under Uhm Woon-kyu and Park He-man back when Chung Do Kwan schools in Korea were still doing the old karate kata which is why it's pretty common for American branches of CDK that have any sort of connection to him to still do the old karate kata (hyung) in addition to Kukkiwon poomsae. The current head of their branch of CDK is his wife Brenda J Sell who I believe got her initial ranking through Ed Sell and Kukkiwon and later trained with GM Park to get Grandmaster ranks from Kukkiwon. Further lineage, Uhm trained directly under Lee Won-kuk (the founder of CDK) who trained directly with Gichin and Gigo Funakoshi who are the founder and founder's son (respectively) of Shotokan karate. This is the same Lineage as the Oh Do kwan and what would become the ITF as General Choi was a student of Lee as well.
Wow Thanx! So much new info and so many rabbit trails to explore! This timeline puts our association head 4th gen and our school only 5th gen with Won Kuk Lee as the 1st... that makes that past feel so much closer. Hopefully I can put my teaching skills into good practice to make the info I can compile as valuable and interesting to next generation. Most of our higher ranking students really seem interested in the history and since they are most likely to go black and continue the CKD tradition here in the states, I think it is an important part of a strong foundation... Thanks again!
 

J. Pickard

Purple Belt
Joined
Jun 8, 2020
Messages
355
Reaction score
332
Wow Thanx! So much new info and so many rabbit trails to explore! This timeline puts our association head 4th gen and our school only 5th gen with Won Kuk Lee as the 1st... that makes that past feel so much closer. Hopefully I can put my teaching skills into good practice to make the info I can compile as valuable and interesting to next generation. Most of our higher ranking students really seem interested in the history and since they are most likely to go black and continue the CKD tradition here in the states, I think it is an important part of a strong foundation... Thanks again!
No problem. Im guessing based on your initial question you are somewhere in the Park lineage under Ed Sell. Sell had a LOT of influence across the US in the early days, arguably as much as Joon Rhee (considered the father of TKD in the states) so a lot of CDK in the US has had some influence from Edward Sell as he traveled a lot. There are actually more than one CDK lineage after Lee, it kinda forked off 3 ways. Uhm Woon-kyu, Son Duk-sung, and Choi Hong-hi all trained under Lee but went different directions. Uhm worked with KTA (later became Kukkiwon) to form the modern curriculum kukkiwon uses today. Son felt the tradition should be preserved and so only taught CDK exactly the way Lee taught it and didnt adopt the unification methods the KTA was involved with. And Choi blended the original CDK teachings with his own methods he developed when he formed the Oh Do Kwan and went on to form the Chang Hon/ITF system.
 

Earl Weiss

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
3,414
Reaction score
781
....................and Choi Hong-hi all trained under Lee but went different directions. ......................
Haven't seen much in the way of actual training although there was some relationship there. Can you provide a link t any sources?
 

J. Pickard

Purple Belt
Joined
Jun 8, 2020
Messages
355
Reaction score
332
Haven't seen much in the way of actual training although there was some relationship there. Can you provide a link t any sources?
I've read it in multiple sources but from a quick glace at the wiki page on Choi, He achieved 4th Dan CDK, but due to accusations of dishonesty, Choi was stripped of his rank and position in the Chung Do Kwan but I was mistaken, this was after Lee left Korea and Son promoted Choi but Choi claimed to have trained under Funakoshi the same as Lee.
 

Earl Weiss

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
3,414
Reaction score
781
I've read it in multiple sources but from a quick glace at the wiki page on Choi, He achieved 4th Dan CDK, but due to accusations of dishonesty, Choi was stripped of his rank and position in the Chung Do Kwan but I was mistaken, this was after Lee left Korea and Son promoted Choi but Choi claimed to have trained under Funakoshi the same as Lee.
What those items typically leave out concerning the advertisement where GM Son stripped General Choi of his CDK Rank:
1. GM Son was no longer head of the CDK at that time having been removed and replaced by GM Uhm.
2. The Same article also supposedly expelled GM Uhm and GM Nam and it is well known GM Uh remained head of the CDK for decades after that and GM Nam remained a respected member and somehow GM Son was gone.

So, not withstanding the question if an organization with you as head awards something, when you are no longer a part of the organization can you withdraw it, we know the efficacy of the purported expulsion actions taken at the same time.
 

J. Pickard

Purple Belt
Joined
Jun 8, 2020
Messages
355
Reaction score
332
GM Nam remained a respected member
I'm curious as to how this works out when hew was a loyalist to Choi for decades (I'm assuming you are referring to Nam Tae-hi) and we all know how Choi's relationship with the rest of the KTA went. The politics surrounding the unification period is a messy thing but personally, I think it can be fun trying to sift through all the rubbish to get the whole picture. From my understanding there are official meeting minutes from the meetings that took place during the unification period that directly contradict a lot of General Choi's claims but I haven't actually seen them personally. I would love to some day.

My Understanding of the incident that happened with Son is that he was appointed the head of CDK by Lee and wanted to use the influence of Choi to spread CDK. He wanted all of the kwans to be CDK and have all of the other Kwans convert to his system. Instead a bunch of high ranking members from CDK got together with government officials and other kwan leaders to talk about unification and presumably to steel the CDK from Son as it was the biggest and most influential Kwan. Son didn't like this and wrote an article in a korean news paper calling them traitors; "With morality and humbleness, the Taekwondo Chung Do Kwan is determined to punish those traitors who threw away their trust to the other numerous Kwans. Especially after Lee Won Kuk left Korea, the traitors deceptively contacted these other Kwans, used the dojang under their own names to slanderously spread their own names." Choi's Rank in CDK was given to him and signed solely by Son which should give him the authority to revoke it. Additionally he was never formally removed from CDK, Choi used his government influence to appoint Uhm and the government backed it recognizing Uhm as the head of CDK and basically pretending Son didn't exist. Son made a valid point in this article too stating "Who can nominate a Kwan Jang in a private dojang except the legal person with the authority? I myself am willing to give up my position as the Kwan Jang, if I see a promising and capable person who can be the next successor, but I am still looking for that person". Based on this Son was usurped but as anyone knows, there are multiple sides to every story so while I'm sure a lot of what he wrote was true, there are likely deeper truths as well that are omitted for his sake.

[ Quotes are from a June 1959 article written by Son Duk-Sung in the paper Seoul Shinmoon]
 
Last edited:

Earl Weiss

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
3,414
Reaction score
781
I'm curious as to how this works out when hew was a loyalist to Choi for decades (I'm assuming you are referring to Nam Tae-hi) and we all know how Choi's relationship with the rest of the KTA went. The politics surrounding the unification period is a messy thing but personally, I think it can be fun trying to sift through all the rubbish to get the whole picture. From my understanding there are official meeting minutes from the meetings that took place during the unification period that directly contradict a lot of General Choi's claims but I haven't actually seen them personally. I would love to some day.

My Understanding of the incident that happened with Son is that he was appointed the head of CDK by Lee and wanted to use the influence of Choi to spread CDK. He wanted all of the kwans to be CDK and have all of the other Kwans convert to his system. Instead a bunch of high ranking members from CDK got together with government officials and other kwan leaders to talk about unification and presumably to steel the CDK from Son as it was the biggest and most influential Kwan. Son didn't like this and wrote an article in a korean news paper calling them traitors; "With morality and humbleness, the Taekwondo Chung Do Kwan is determined to punish those traitors who threw away their trust to the other numerous Kwans. Especially after Lee Won Kuk left Korea, the traitors deceptively contacted these other Kwans, used the dojang under their own names to slanderously spread their own names." Choi's Rank in CDK was given to him and signed solely by Son which should give him the authority to revoke it. Additionally he was never formally removed from CDK, Choi used his government influence to appoint Uhm and the government backed it recognizing Uhm as the head of CDK and basically pretending Son didn't exist. Son made a valid point in this article too stating "Who can nominate a Kwan Jang in a private dojang except the legal person with the authority? I myself am willing to give up my position as the Kwan Jang, if I see a promising and capable person who can be the next successor, but I am still looking for that person". Based on this Son was usurped but as anyone knows, there are multiple sides to every story so while I'm sure a lot of what he wrote was true, there are likely deeper truths as well that are omitted for his sake.

[ Quotes are from a June 1959 article written by Son Duk-Sung in the paper Seoul Shinmoon]
The fact that the only source is GM Son is quite telling, however I would not discount having government forces at work since as recounted in detail in "A Killing Art" they have been "influential" throughout the history of TKD. FWIW I asked GM Nam how it was that with typical loyalties to Kwans and instructors so many gravitated to General Choi and the Oh Do Kwan. His response was two fold. One was that Oh Do Kwan often translated as "The Gym of My Way" was that name spoken by each in the first person meaning the gym for all of us could belong as opposed to joining an existing rival gym; and 2. GM Son, had no resources for training and spreading TKD whereas the military resources could be used. If they wanted to do a demo in Malaysia, Vietnam etc. they would get on a military transport and go. I am sure the unspoken #3 had to do with government influences.
 

Earl Weiss

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
3,414
Reaction score
781
" Choi's Rank in CDK was given to him and signed solely by Son which should give him the authority to revoke it.

[ Quotes are from a June 1959 article written by Son Duk-Sung in the paper Seoul Shinmoon]
I am sorry, but if you think this makes sense - OK. I for one say that dog does not hunt. It was awarded by GM Son as you say " Rank in CDK" Now it could be revoked by someone no longer in the CDK or at least not the head.
 

J. Pickard

Purple Belt
Joined
Jun 8, 2020
Messages
355
Reaction score
332
Now it could be revoked by someone no longer in the CDK or at least not the head.
I would refer back to GM Son's question on how could someone promoted by Son himself have the authority to remove Son as the Kwan Jang? Again, I do take this claim with a grain of salt as it is clear that the history of TKD during the unification is rocky with a lot of here say and contradictions, but this would be akin to a black belt in your dojang saying that you are no longer in charge, they are because a bunch of your other black belts and the local mayor all said so.

From my perspective this seems like both sides were simply trying to seize power for personal gain and Son just didn't have as many resources. Which from a cultural perspective, as they were trying to use TKD as a method of reigniting Korea's international identity as an autonomous nation, it makes sense to remove Son and appoint Uhm but it still seems like it was a very underhanded move and possibly even illegitimate.

Now I present a question to you. If you take an item and modify until it has no original parts is it still the same item? Modern CDK under Uhm's lineage (which I am a part of) is nearly unrecognizable from it's origins under Lee. Uhm's CDK changed the curriculum entirely from hyung to poomsae, training methods used, and the way techniques are performed whereas Son continued across the east coast US to teach the way he was taught by Lee with little to no variation. If you are given an axe by your grandfather and have had to replace the head twice and the handle 4 times is it still your grandfathers axe?
 

Earl Weiss

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
3,414
Reaction score
781
I would refer back to GM Son's question on how could someone promoted by Son himself have the authority to remove Son as the Kwan Jang?
IMO this is a non question since to my knowledge - and I have yet to see anything different - General Choi had no official CDK position o hand in this and had no position with the CDK as part of GM Son's removal. There was clearly a Vacuum when the Founder Lee Won Kuk left and various seniors traced their lineage and rank to him. History Tells us GM Uhm filled the void when GM Son was gone and no one except GM Son seemed unhappy with that. Similarly GM Nam remained a respected member.
 

Earl Weiss

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
3,414
Reaction score
781
Now I present a question to you. If you take an item and modify until it has no original parts is it still the same item? Modern CDK under Uhm's lineage (which I am a part of) is nearly unrecognizable from it's origins under Lee. Uhm's CDK changed the curriculum entirely from hyung to poomsae, training methods used, and the way techniques are performed whereas Son continued across the east coast US to teach the way he was taught by Lee with little to no variation. If you are given an axe by your grandfather and have had to replace the head twice and the handle 4 times is it still your grandfathers axe?
No doubt GM Uhm got on board with the whole WT / KKW unification issue and adopted their standards and practices. Now we get into the issue as to whether CDK was an organization or a style. Frankly I see it as an organization which could change however it sees fit. While an interesting topic applicable across many organizations (ATA comes to mind, as did KKW changing it's form system) I am clueless how that fits into this discussion thread,
 

J. Pickard

Purple Belt
Joined
Jun 8, 2020
Messages
355
Reaction score
332
whether CDK was an organization or a style.
Interesting point to consider. Admittedly, this is an off topic tangent.
General Choi had no official CDK position
You are correct, He was given an honorary title of Master in the CDK by Son and was well respected by the rest of the CDK at that time. As far as his training under Lee, I have my CDK family tree (project I did for 2nd dan years ago) in front of me with Choi right next to Park. But given that I only put the Surname and not the full name I think I may have mistaken Choi Hong-hi with Choi Younk-sik.
 

Earl Weiss

Senior Master
Joined
Jan 27, 2009
Messages
3,414
Reaction score
781
He was given an honorary title of Master in the CDK by Son and was well respected by the rest of the CDK at that time.
And therein is something that speaks Volumes. No doubt General Choi's political / government connections gave him a huge amount of influence, but, still there is something to be said by CDK luminaries, being they Han Cha Kyo, Nam Tae Hi, as part of the ODK or foreign Instructors such as HU Lee, Jhoon Rhee, and He Il Cho that chose to align with him.
As we know it was politics and being persona non grata that lead to the departure of many.
 
OP
T

TheTraveleress

White Belt
Joined
May 11, 2023
Messages
14
Reaction score
5
Wow! Gents, aside from the Lee, Choi, Son history... and thankfully there is no current dispute at the top of our association, but are we questioning how this applies to current practice and rank awards/demotions? I cannot even fathom a reason for demotion other than complete dishonor or misuse of CKD ... I am not aware of any in my association demoted, only one never promoted. With this understanding, the question is then having earned and being awarded a CDK rank, who has the power to demote? If the head of our association passes on the baton, can the next head remove rank he has awarded? Wouldnt this be something that would be clearly deliniated in the association bylaws? It seems that to remove rank it would require witness and agreement from the other GMs in the association at the very least and for an offense clearly deemed dishonoring of a black belt by the association by laws. Does CKD as a Kwan have a set of rules, guidelines, expectations etc? I would assume if there is such a set standard it would be incorporated into any CKD association bylaws? Not to detract from your historical debate, I am genuinely interested as the GMs in our association are advancing in age and for an association to continue, someone must promoted to head when the time comes, how will that effect the rest of the association, those who have left the association but may want to return with a new leader, those disciplined or elevated against the opinion of the next head... POLITITCS!!!
 

Flying Crane

Sr. Grandmaster
Joined
Sep 21, 2005
Messages
15,196
Reaction score
4,853
Location
San Francisco
In my opinion, rank cannot be taken away, but someone can be kicked out of an organization. They could claim to revoke rank, but a person only needs to show his certificates. If rank was given and later the person was kicked out, it is important to be honest about that. But once given, that ship has sailed.
 

Latest Discussions

Top