Hapkido - Tang Soo Do link

[Moo D]

On the Hapkisool website there is a mention that the founder of the Moo duk Kwan Tang Soo Do, DJN Hwang, kee was once a student of Hapkido under Choi, Young sool in the 1950's.

I have read a lot of DJN Hwang,s books and never found a reference to this, Does anyone know more about this?? Length of time DJN Hwang trained with DJN Choi??

It would help some of the history research I am doing in Tang Soo Do. I am not familiar with Hapkido, therefore are there any techniques that are shared between Choi's Hapkido and Hwang's Tang Soo Do??

Yours in Martial Arts,

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Moo:

Wish I could help you but everything I have found to date seems to indicate that Choi has become something of a lightening rod for people who want to validate what they do. I'm sure part of it stems from the fact that he was illiterate and probably out of touch with most communications other than what his students brought to him. It also might stem from the fact that most students were with him only a relatively short time so the turnover must have been pretty heavy over the years. Whose to say WHO studied with HIM and who studied with a student, who studied with him. But ask around and everyone who needs authentification all studied with the Master. Far as I'm concerned if that were true he would have died a very rich man indeed!!

What we do know is that he spent time in Japan, that he learned something there and that he brought that something back to Korea and taught it to some people there. No set curriculum, no documentation and damn few records, though I understand that his family has some of the enrollment books. Taking a look at Hwang Kee there are some of the same problems. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[Moo D]

Thanks Bruce,

I agree, DJN Hwangs past is quite patchy, even in his own writings on his history. The problem is that even in our Hosinsul we do not seem to share the same techniques as Choi's Hapkido, and not the philosophy. Therefore, I can't see why DJN Hwang would not use the techniques he learnt from Choi within Tang Soo Do, if you know what I mean???????

Tang Soo!!

 

[Moo D]

Also, DJN Hwang kee history is disputed by many. However, the evidence that is seen in the TSD curriculum is that there is a Japanese, Chinese and Korean influence. The fact that the Hyungs Yuk ro and Hwa Sun are translated from the Muye Dobu Tonji give the korean influence in TSD as well as the favouritism for High and Jump kicking (Tae Kyon).

But as you say, there is very little documentation pre 1945 and the formation of the Moo Duk kwan, that supports the experience in MA's gained by DJn Hwang. All I can say is that TSD has a great depth in both technique and philosophy that must have been gained by DJn Hwang in his travels!!

Regards,

 

[kwanjang]

Greetings:
Perhaps Master McHenry (out of TX) has some more info on this to share with you. He has a lot of info on his website, and he is part of the USKMAF group.

 

[Moo D]

Thanks rudy,

I'll check that source out!!

Regards,

 

[dosandojang]

I asked Master Mac, and he said while anything is possible...He does not think this ever happened. Neither do I....

 

[kwanjang]

Same old problem. It is extemely difficult to find out what really took place in Korean martial arts of any kind. That is why I don't envy the likes of Bruce who tries so hard to figure it all out. That has to be frustrating.

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Rudy:

Actually, it not all that bad--- at least not from an academic point of view. The history can be very cut and dry. Where the static comes in is when a person suddenly is revealed for having constructed things in a way that facts don't support. Witness Joo Bang Lee and the WHRDA people. Nasty business that. So, for instance, I can say that Korea has had its own martial traditions for generations and the pro-Japanese tradition side says, "no they didn't-- its all Japanese stuff repackaged." Then along comes some thing like the MYTBTJ and suddenly the pro-J tradition people shut-up in a hurry because now there is a historical provenence. In this way its not the research that causes most of the chaos but the regular conflicts between what facts are and the way people want Korean martial traditions to be. I can point out over and over again that there is no documentation supporting Choi mastering DRAJJ or training under Takeda but if thats what people want to believe whats a person going to do, right? I still laugh when some magazine reprints that old garbage about Chinese Boxing starting at the Shaolin Temple, but its the way people want their history to read. :idunno:

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[kwanjang]

Yep, folks will always believe what they want to, and seldom do they take heed to what stares them right in the face. For me, I most often rely on my gut instinct backed up by whatever historical data that makes sense. Whenever something concrete comes along, I'll change my mind.

FWIW, I did see the books GM Suh speaks of; however, one big problem, I can't read them. Hence, it could have been other things. Last time he and I spoke of the books, he said he was about to open the third one. With that he means to his organization... not the public. This was his greatest concern, as he felt like the Korean martial art world was just waiting to pick up his stuff.

One thing I know for sure. His son, Master Sung Jin Suh is doing stuff that I have never seen other WKSA Masters do (Korean or Caucasian). So, there IS more stuff, but it is guarded. It will be interesting to see what his son will do with the "secret" material when he takes over

 

[Moo D]

It is interesting as to why the Koreans feel that they need to have a long tradition in Martial Arts. The Muye Dobu Tonji shows that a martial tradition has existed in Korea for the last 300-400 years and some earlier paintings have shown some martial arts. However, the quest to have a more in depth martial history seems to dominate korean martial arts.

It seems a shame to me, because of the KMA in existence, most have many virtues without the need for a 2000 year history. What does it matter if it is only 60 years old, as long as it adds something to your life then 'what the hell' if It is just as good as any other martial art with a 2000 year history.

Making the history jaded only adds to the scepticism by the masses of what is true. If by saying that DJn Hwang was a student of Choi young Sool is not actually factual, then the only reason for the historic fiction is to validate the art itself. Similarly with DJn Hwang and some of his claimed personal history that has been disputed over the years by other senior masters. It leaves the fact that all Korean Martial Art history in the 20th Century is either true, false or somewhere in between.

The real proof is the depth within the MA itself and not how many millenia of history it has. If it is indeed incorrect that DJN Hwang was ever a student of Choi, young sool, then this only does a disservice to Hapakisool as a MA.

Regards,

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Moo D:

I tend to agree with your sentiments. An art, or martial science for that matter, does not have to go back centuries to be valid. FWIW the O-Gae (Five Tenents) is traditionally ascribed to the Three Kingdoms Period and is still an influence in many modern dojangs around the world. However, as a researcher I tend not to go back before the Mongolian incursion of the Yuan Dynasty as just about all documentation is found in and through the Yi Dynasty of Korean history. So, whats the point? The point, as I see it, is that since the Japanese Occupation advocates for Japanese traditions have regularly disparaged the Koreans and their martial traditions. In fact, during the Russo-Japanese War, Korean soldiers were not used for fighting but rather as porters and teamsters for transporting Japanese materials to the front in Manchuria. It also did not help that many Korean traditions were repressed while Japanese arts imposed on the Korean culture during the Occupation. It also does not help that even Korean nationals returning after the War brought Japanese traditions with them. It seems that these Japanese imports soon surplanted any chance for the Korean MS to reassert themselves. I tend to be a cheer-leader for refocusing on the arts and skills of the Korean MS rather than continuing to emphasize material brought into the country from elsewhere. What confuses me is how very little the Koreans themselves seem to be invested in retaining and examining these traditions. Its almost like practitioners here in the States care more than they do! FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[Moo D]

I totally agree Bruce,

The loss to the Koreans is the neglect to look at what they have achieved with their flavour of MA's. Though the Japanese influences in the Korean Penisula have been the predominant drive for their current MA's, the reality as I see it is that the Japanese portion of the KMA has a distinctly Korean flavour. I have been studying TSD for the past 8 years and before that TKD for 7 years (a ten year gap in between) and I can say with all honesty the remants of Japanese influence has been taken over by the korean flavour. TSD is quoted as the Korean version of Shotokan Kara-te, and that it may be. However, if anyone is to look at the techniques used, stances and variations on Kicks in TSD then they would realise that it is far away from the Shotokan style, as is today. It has been Koreanised and added to by some more tradtional aspects of KMA, especially the High Kicking (and flying kicks) taken from Tae Kyon.

I guess in reality, that the measure of the MA, regardless of it's roots, is the development of the person and not the origin of the art. Though the Koreans have successfully transformed what they were force fed to by the Japanese during the occupation and made it of a distinct and 'Korean' Style.

Regards,

 

[glad2bhere]

".....However, if anyone is to look at the techniques used, stances and variations on Kicks in TSD then they would realise that it is far away from the Shotokan style, as is today. It has been Koreanised and added to by some more tradtional aspects of KMA, especially the High Kicking (and flying kicks) taken from Tae Kyon......"

Yes, and this is Big ***** #2 of mine right behind the one I mentioned in my previous post (Big ***** #1 --Ignoring Koreas' Past Traditions).

The Korean culture has had a rough time of it for generations and one of their best-developed survival tools has been the ability to examine material at home and abroad, select what they want from a pragmatic point-of-view and use it to their best advantage..... to survive. Some people might see this a culturally shallow and mercenary and maybe it is, I don't know for sure. What I will say is that the approach is deeply ingrained in Korean culture, and it works. Big ***** # 2 addresses the idea that some folks, particularly cousins on the other side of the Sea of Japan, don't see this as a successful survival technique for a culture. Rather I get the impression they see it as a bastardization of THEIR Japanese traditions. Now, nobody I know said the Japanese bastardized Okinawa-te when it came to Japan as "Funakoshis' Karate. And I can't find anyone who says the Japanese "bastardized" Tang beauacratic models when they adopted these to the Japanese court. Therefore I have a real problem with folks beating on the Koreans for "borrowing" what they learned during the Occupation and adding their own pragmatic spin on it from past traditions. Now, there is ONE caveat that I would throw in here. When the Koreans "borrow something" from another culture I think they would be better off if they do something more than just change the names. I have seen Kumdo people who still use Kendo rules, kendo dress and Kendo armour for competition but swear the art they practice is indigenous to Korea. I think this only adds to the confusion.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[Moo D]

Well said Bruce,

Honesty about ones past and own history is a virtue based in all doctrine of MA's. It is sad to see that the modern MA history of Korean MA is so cloudy, though the tenets for all MA is to be loyal, honest, just and modest. Yet time and time again, it is hard and sometimes near impossible to find the real History of TSD, SBD, HKD or TKD.

All martial arts have borrowed something from somewhere or someone at some point in their history. We all know that MA did not start in Japan or Okinawa, yet the insistence that Korean MA is just a copy of what the Japanese have done is again not following the practice which is preached.

However, clouding the history of any martial art to steer thought in a different (maybe incorrect) direction is not really Mudo anyway!!

Regards,

 

[kwanjang]

Moo and Bruce:
IMHO, martial arts started with the first need to gather food and keep it along with the plot folks liked to call their own. It is not a thing that got started as an art, it simply was a survival tool. As such, people everywhere tried to increase their skill in order to best the next guy looking at their food or shelter to make it his own, and this effort did not have boundaries or conditions. Heck, we did not even HAVE boundaries when fighting skills were being developed. Fighting and survival skills flourished everywhere there was a need, and if one saw a better skill somewhere else it was adopted immediately to improve the person or group's survival rate.

To assume that one country did not beg, borrow, or steal the best technique they ran across is akin to burrying your head in the sand in the hope that no one sees you. Today, we look at fighting and survival skills as an art form, and this may have prompted a need or desire to catalogue it. I believe we are talking about two different entities altogether, and I think we can't just lump the "art" and the "survival of the fittest, best armed, and most skilled in order to remain alive and well fed" together to suit our quest for documentation. Thoughts?

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Rudy:

I think you are right on the money as I have seen many a discussion of martial arts and martial science come exactly to this point.

As you say, on the one hand is the pragmatic side of the martial experience-- call it science if you want to---- where people are interested in survival, plain and simple. On the other hand is the "art" side where people have the luxury of codifying, catgorizing and long-term development. I think the thing that drives me is the idea I can't escape that we (of the modern world) somehow took a wrong turn somewhere along the way. Not that its entirely our fault. Technology in the form of guns and smart-bombs seem to have passed we martial artists by. Even the paid military of today depend much more on their weapons than on 1:1 encounters. But one of the things that has not been taken from us is the choice as to whether we toss out the old ways or not and the traditionalist in me fights this. In a way its a bit like when they tear down some old home in a neighborhood to make way for a new strip mall. Somehow I feel as though the KMA is just that little bit less for having lost that bit of swordwork, or staff, belt or stick because people can't be bothered with something thats not flashy or current enough.

Now, Ill be the first to agree that these old arts are not for everyone. There are more than a few who would forego old technologies for the ease and freedom of what we have today. I just think that we are somehow diminished when these skills are allowed to fall into disuse and be forgotten. Even my form work reflects a desire to keep older ways alive. Certainly I train in the hyung of my kwan, but I don't let that stop me from delving deeply into the Okinawan kata or the Chinese forms for what benefits it can yeild to my Hapkido training. FWIW.

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[kwanjang]

Hello Bruce:
You and I are on the same page. I LOVE the traditional martial arts of Korea; however, I understand that there are different views on what people consider traditional. In this, I simply tell myself that we must allow folks to interpret the situation to the best of our ability given the information that is available. So, I don't fool around with dropping or adding things from the curriculum I learned from my GM; however, I continue to search for more knowledge, and I allow my students the freedom to seek good technique wherever they can find it.

As a man who needs to keep his dojang doors open, I also must provide my consumers with THEIR needs, so I give them what they want in the hope I can interest them in the full monty down the road. I will not sell rank, and therefore I'll never get rich, but so far this approach has kept my dojang doors open for thirty years. I can't ask for more

 

[glad2bhere]

Dear Rudy:

Many thanks.

BTW: Check your e-mail when you get a chance, would you?

Best Wishes,

Bruce

 

[Master Todd Miller]

Part of the problem is that most people want a quick fix martial art where they can learn how to do everything needed for self defense in a short time without any commitment. The fact is that it takes many years of hard training before you develope high level skills. This is where role models are crucial for lower belts to pattern themselves after! Nothing beats hard and correct training for developing self-defense and charachter skills.

Take care
Todd Miller
Korea Jungki Hapkido & Guhapdo Assc.
www.millersmudo.com