Weapons in Taekwondo???

Jimi said:
Last Fearner, you seemed ready to belittle me for not understanding or having rank in TKD simply because a post I made refered to the fact that the first Black Belt I received was an uncertified gift, regardless that I have attained rank since then.

Mr. Jimi, I did not intend for my comment about your "Black Belt Gift" to sound belittling. In fact, when I read it, I thought it was probably quite an honor, and I can understand why you would keep the belt in a special place at your home. It is unfortunate that this teacher did not live long enough to solidify the presentation, nor be able to continue to teach you. I am sorry for your loss there. Actually, I searched your profile and previous posts to try to understand where you were coming from, and what insights you might have to Taekwondo, but found nothing mentioned, although I might have missed it. Thank you for clearing up your connection somewhat.

Also, I did not mean that your viewpoint on the "recent creation" of Taekwondo is being "narrow minded," but rather a narrow perspective or interpretation. I interpret the definition of Taekwondo itself as either being a narrow definition attached to General Choi, or a broad definition encompassing the entire Korean Martial Art history. The Korean Grandmasters that I trained under took this point of view, and explained to me why the broad definition is the more accurate one.

Extensive research has lead me to have a deeper understanding than is available in most modern curriculum, and by the superficial appearances of poomsae, and a basic breakdown when defining the term "Tae - Kwon - Do." There is much more to the Art than meets the eye, even for those who have studied it thoroughly for a decade or two.

Anyhow, thank you for responding, and I respect your opinion about what you have learned pertaining to Taekwondo and weapons. :)

Respectfully,
CM D. J. Eisenhart
 
Last Fearner, I believe I now have a better understanding of the term TKD in regards to refering to more than just hand and foot art. Respects to you SIR! PEACE
 
Well I have train inKorea a couple of times and when we have train we haveused certain weapons is it TKD in mind yes it was tought to me by a TKD Grand Master instructor, so it is, was it invented by the Koreans no certainly not borrowed by them certainly but over the yearsa it has become part of there teachings which makes it theres in my eyes.

Last bit of info. here been training 43 years seen alot of different style out there, have borrowed some great techniques over those years, own my school and I teach TKD both Olympic and Traditional so everything I teach my students they simple know as TKD, not that it was a Karate or Kung Fu or FMA, because I do not teach those Arts, I teach TKD, they know where the weapon training came from but it is referred to TKD at my school.
Terry
 
You're replying to posts from 2006, and many of those people are no longer active here.
And you're wrong. Mainstream TKD does not include any weapons. Any weapons training provided at a particular school is imported from some other art. If you're going to claim otherwise, please provide a link to any of the major TKD organizations that shows weapons in their curriculum.
You won't find any.
 
And you're wrong. Mainstream TKD does not include any weapons. Any weapons training provided at a particular school is imported from some other art. If you're going to claim otherwise, please provide a link to any of the major TKD organizations that shows weapons in their curriculum.
I think it's common enough that the answer to "does TKD use weapons" can be "yes". I've used them in every school I've been to, and I plan to use them in my curriculum. It may not be part of the organization's curriculum, but there's a significant number of people out there who did weapons in their TKD class.

My weapons training therefore is not imported from another art. It's at least second-generation Taekwondo.

(I'm not saying you're doing this, but) it's also important not to shame schools that do weapons training. I've seen people call schools mcdojos just because they do nunchaku.
 
If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have? Still 4 - just because you call a tail a leg does not make it so. Yes, many TKD schools also teach weapons.
However one need look no further than the basic definition of Tae - Jumping, Flying , to Kick or smash with the foot Kwon- To Punch or destroy with Fist Do - Art or way (Knees trikes being classed as type of Kick and Elbow or other hand part strikes being classed as Punch)
 
If you call a tail a leg, how many legs does a dog have? Still 4 - just because you call a tail a leg does not make it so. Yes, many TKD schools also teach weapons.
However one need look no further than the basic definition of Tae - Jumping, Flying , to Kick or smash with the foot Kwon- To Punch or destroy with Fist Do - Art or way (Knees trikes being classed as type of Kick and Elbow or other hand part strikes being classed as Punch)
By that definition, grappling does not exist in TKD.

The Oxford English Dictionary will put common-use words into the dictionary. If enough people called a tail a leg, then the definition would eventually be updated.
 
I think it's common enough that the answer to "does TKD use weapons" can be "yes". I've used them in every school I've been to, and I plan to use them in my curriculum. It may not be part of the organization's curriculum, but there's a significant number of people out there who did weapons in their TKD class.

My weapons training therefore is not imported from another art. It's at least second-generation Taekwondo.

(I'm not saying you're doing this, but) it's also important not to shame schools that do weapons training. I've seen people call schools mcdojos just because they do nunchaku.
I would Never say weapons are or ever have been mainstream in TKD. I suspect your somewhat non-traditional TKD instructor incorporated them from some other training he may have received or picked them up from Youtube, who knows. Neither good nor bad.

Or Korean GM has used the sword in demonstrations many times and is quite good with a Bo staff. He said he learned both of them in the Korean army, Not through TKD.
Many of our black belts have learned staff techniques and two 'patterns' to practice from our GM, but it is in no way mainstream or part of our curriculum.
I know, or more accurately knew them but with a background in Kali, the long staff was always very awkward for me.
 
I would Never say weapons are or ever have been mainstream in TKD. I suspect your somewhat non-traditional TKD instructor incorporated them from some other training he may have received or picked them up from Youtube, who knows. Neither good nor bad.

Or Korean GM has used the sword in demonstrations many times and is quite good with a Bo staff. He said he learned both of them in the Korean army, Not through TKD.
Many of our black belts have learned staff techniques and two 'patterns' to practice from our GM, but it is in no way mainstream or part of our curriculum.
I know, or more accurately knew them but with a background in Kali, the long staff was always very awkward for me.
The bong was taught in the military when some units were still taught TSD.
 
By saying 'bong', it that the same as a Bo staff? Or were y'all tripping balls!
Yes, Im using the Hangul term. They drug tested us too much to have that kind of fun!
 
I've seen people call schools mcdojos just because they do nunchaku.
Most often what you see is the movie version or extreme forms competition version of nunchaku - a lot of fancy flashy swinging mostly devoid of any authentic lineage and application. If you look at actual traditional nunchaku kata, it is very less impressive (the moves being more deliberate) but more effective against weapons such as clubs or staff.

Weapons were a separate discipline (kobudo) and while many of karate's founders used weapons such as staff and sword as part of their security profession, very few karate styles have weapons as part of their intrinsic curriculum (mine does, but not nunchaku) though some styles (and individual schools) may have added them as supplementary offerings. Traditional weapons commonly became associated with karate mostly post-WWII, thanks largely to Taira Shinken as a way to keep the kobudo arts alive.

This is a different history from CMA (and FMA) where weapon skills accompanied empty hand ones. Can someone comment on the origins of this different evolution? Perhaps this topic is better covered in the General forum.
 
This is a different history from CMA (and FMA) where weapon skills accompanied empty hand ones. Can someone comment on the origins of this different evolution? Perhaps this topic is better covered in the General forum.
My take on it is that the Japanese and Okinawan weapons can be roughly categorized as 1) weapons of war (sword, spear, naginata, archery, etc,) and 2) weapons made from tools or modified from farm implements or otherwise available to or manufacturable by the general public (knives, weighted chains, nunchaku, oar, staff). It is my understanding that Japan prohibited the Okinawans from possessing weapons of war. However, it would be impossible to remove every kitchen knife or shop knife or field knife or stick or piece of chain that could be used as or converted into a weapon. So Okinawan kobudo developed around the use of these items while the Japanese weapons of war remained as distinct topics of study (sword, spear, naginata, bow). What was available to you to study would depend on your cultural and socio-economic background.

Chinese martial arts often developed with at least some influence from military folks, so the traditional military weapons would have made it into the training along with things that might be improvised or manufacturable by the commoners. In the Chinese arts we have the straight sword and the saber and their variants, as well as the spear, the shield, guan dao and horse cutter. But we also have commoner weapons like the staff and shorter sticks, knives, Omei daggers (finger-ring daggers), monk spade, three-sectional staff, all kinds of odd pole-arm and club variations that give the impression of some back-woods peasant getting creative with the materials at hand, like the wolf-tooth club and various rakes and Frankensteined spears and whatnot.

At any rate, I think the differences we see reflect the way the methods developed and who had input and influence on that process.
 
Many traditional KMA have weapons as well.
 
Most often what you see is the movie version or extreme forms competition version of nunchaku - a lot of fancy flashy swinging mostly devoid of any authentic lineage and application. If you look at actual traditional nunchaku kata, it is very less impressive (the moves being more deliberate) but more effective against weapons such as clubs or staff.
I don't really see the point of this. I'm not arguing against it. I just don't know what you're arguing against.
 
By that definition, grappling does not exist in TKD.

The Oxford English Dictionary will put common-use words into the dictionary. If enough people called a tail a leg, then the definition would eventually be updated.
I guess that would be a reason not to consider the Oxford English dictionary a great reference.
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top