PDA

View Full Version : "Westernized jujutsu"



johan smits
5th March 2001, 09:44
This subject came up in another thread - Panta rhei: koryu and evolution - started by Robert Reinberger.
He used the term "westernized jujutsu" , a subject in which I am very interested.

In my experience some people, mostly with experience in koryu have a tendency to look down upon so-called "westernized jujutsu". Much to the chagrin of practitioners of the said art.

It might be possible that "westernized jujutsu" suffers from a certain lack of identity when confronted or compared to koryu jujutsu.
This might be an explanation for the interest in the arts of their origin.

I am very much interested in the opinion of people who have experience with the above mentioned arts on this subject.

Just to make myself clear on this point I am not in favor of one of them (koryu jujutsu or "westernized jujutsu")
and I rate them, although they are different arts, as equal.


Regards,

Johan Smits

Neil Hawkins
6th March 2001, 23:45
Johan,

I think the source of the problem stems from some of the practicioners of 'modern jujutsu' who try and claim koryu status. There is nothing wrong with their style per se, but their attitude and self promotion are the point of contention.

That said there are some styles that I have seen that are terrible and are purely cashing in on the grappling boom at present and the jujutsu boom of some years ago.

Here's an analogy that I like:

You have a can of paint (in this case jujutsu) it is good paint, the perfect color. Over a period of time conditions vary, you decide to experiment and mix little bits of other colors into your can subtly changing the color. As you mature you decide that your paint needs to be passed on, you choose someone and give him the paint can. He too experiments and adds different colors.

Over a period of time the can of paint passes through many hands and many other colors get added, the current color does not match the original color much any more, it's still good paint but it's not the same.

Someone comes along who never saw the original paint, he only has heard stories. Today people value the old things more, so he decides that he wants to return to the old paint.

It is impossible to remove the colors that have been mixed in over the years, they now form part of the paint, you can try to add larger quantities of various colours to try and override the effects of the added colors. You may get something that resembles the original color. But it is still not the original paint.

This is what some people have tried to do, they are taking the new paint, be it judo, aikido, karate or what-ever and are trying to add other bits and arrive back at the original jujutsu. You cannot reverse engineer like that. There is nothing wrong with their system, but it is not jujutsu.

If they were to acknowledge the process, then that is fine. Many people do do this, John Bluming is one example that springs to mind. But many try to hide behind names and traditions that are not valid, this is wrong.

Most 'westernised jujutsu' systems are perfectly good martial arts as long as no one claims that they are traditional jujutsu. Some however are not, and unfortunately it is often those that recieve the coverage. They bring any bad feeling on themselves and lower the standard of fighting as a whole.

Regards

Neil

johan smits
7th March 2001, 08:43
Hi Neil,

Thank you very much for your reply. I agree with you on some points. You give an accurate description of, in my view an important part of the problem.


I don't think the source of the problem stems from practitioners of "modern Jujutsu". I think the source of the problem can be found in the lack of identity from which "westernized jujutsu" suffers.

Please note I do not use the term "modern jujutsu".
In my view there are (for this discussion) three forms of jujutsu: koryu jujutsu; westernized jujutsu; modern jujutsu. The last term at least for the sake of convenience can be used for jujutsu styles, founded after 1900 in Japan.

Westernized jujutsu, has been in Europe for almost a century. The lack of identity from which is suffered comes from the fact that no complete system of jujutsu has been transferred to the West.

The first teachers did teach koryu jujutsu for a part.
Tenjin Shin'yo ryu; Yoshin ryu and Ryoi Shinto ryu were three systems which were taught.
However these first teachers did not transmit the complete systems. What they taught was mainly, part of the syllabus of their ryu, for self-defense.
They named it jujutsu and they graded their pupils who also used the name jujutsu.

Now if those teachers taught an art to which they referred to as jujutsu, then it is jujutsu. Nothing wrong with that.

The next problem is that westernized jujutsu was mainly a bag of tricks. No substantial theory, no history beyond one generation.
Fairly soon after jujutsu had been "established" another system came to the West.

Judo, well defined, a good theory based on a sound system and explained in a way westerners could understand. Let's not forget well organized and with a lot of publicity.


After judo got started jujutsu almost disappeared in Europe.
There were teachers, mostly the stubborn one's who did not organize, who kept teaching the "original jujutsu".

Later with the karate/kungfu/grappling boom yes jujutsu lost even more of it's almost non-existing identity.
Jujutsu teachers started calling jujutsu "an open system" sort of anything goes, put them in a gi, belt around, they start moving then it's jujutsu.

You state " this is what some people do" that's right but it is as you say "some people".
There are other people around, serious people who do care about an art they value.

Now,we should learn something from history shouldn't we?

In westernized jujutsu as I see it the next "big influence", like it or not, is going to be koryu jujutsu.

For now,


Regards,

Johan

Rob
7th March 2001, 12:06
It's so rare I' m even remotely qualified to comment on something in e-budo that I couldn't let the opportunity slip by. !!

As a student for 10 odd years and now an instructor in what is undoubtably and unashamedly both a modern and westernised style of Jiu Jitsu I can fully understand the fascination with the Koryu.

I can't speak for the majority but for myself I primarily took up Jiu Jitusu because I wanted to a) be able to defend myself and b) do something 'exotic' !.

As I've progressed and trained I'm convinced that the style I study does teach effective self defence skills (without going into all that that entails here). There are clearly unifying prinicples primarily based on physics and psychology which make the art sometimes brutally effective.

However it does not have a 500 year old history and much of the traditions and more esotoric knowledge have been deliberately dropped..

So I find myself know wondering do I want to teach self defence and effective control and fighting techniques for the next 25 - 30 years or do I want something more ?

And it is that search for something more that has led me to search (so far without success) for an instructor in an older art. I'm not looking for combat effectiveness or self defence what I'm looking for is that mind set, the commitment, the culture if you will that sets anything with a long history apart from something more modern.

These things are hard to describe in words so perhaps a metaphor might better serve... There are some incredible buildings being built today in many ways more efficient and impressive than anything seen before.. but to gaze upon the pyramids will always affect me more not because they are better buildings or even becuase they were built using 'primative' methods but because they have endured .. they have a history..

Just my thoughts, treat them as you will

johan smits
7th March 2001, 13:10
Hi Robert,

lots of koryu do not have a history going back 500 years.Suppose we agree that every ryu founded before 1900 is koryu, we have a lot of them. Now let's say before 1800, in that case we have a lot less of them and some very famous koryu would loose their status as such.
So it all is a bit relative.

Please do not get me wrong. There is nothing wrong with Westernized jujutsu. Far from it!
Thanks to the dedication to jujutsu of just a few people we are abel to learn a wonderful art.

Now imagine the only thing these people had were the techniques as taught to them by their teachers. They had no connection to an age old "clan". They had only themselves and their techniques had better work or else they would be out of business very soon. They were tough people and worthy of our respect.

It is just that throughout the years I noticed a lot of people, and often those with a background in koryu reacted a bit negative about westernized jujutsu and there is no reason for that.

Koryu jujutsu will be in my opinion the next big influence on westernized jujutsu. This can go either way, good or bad. It is up to us (all of us!) as jujutsu practitioners how we are going to deal with that.

Westernized jujutsu is a form of jujutsu, no matter what.
No matter what people say, it has been here for almost a century and it is here to stay.

The pyramids do not affect me more than modern buildings, they affect me in a different way.


Your thoughts are much appreciated.

Regards,

Johan Smits

Rob
7th March 2001, 22:29
Johan

I think you are right that the Koryu JuJitsu styles will become much more widely known in the near future and that this will have an affect on the more 'modern styles'.

In some ways this will be a positive thing ,rediscovering roots and looking for some of the links to the past can be a wonderful thing.

I think inevitably there will me a lot of brand new 'Kory'arts springing up and a fair number of fakes around though, but like every other fad these will pass and move onto the next big thing and the serious students will continue to train.

Interesting discussion I hope others join us.

Robert Reinberger
8th March 2001, 13:23
Dear Buyu,

I regard this topic as a very interesting one, and it concerns a big part of what I'm doing. Johan, thank you for starting that thread. I hope you will excuse my late response, I haven't had the time to compose this post earlier.


Originally posted by johan smits:
In my view there are (for this discussion) three forms of jujutsu: koryu jujutsu; westernized jujutsu; modern jujutsu. The last term at least for the sake of convenience can be used for jujutsu styles, founded after 1900 in Japan.

In another post, Johan wrote:
Suppose we agree that every ryu founded before 1900 is koryu, .....Johan, I know it's problematic to apply our western concept of strict separation and categorizing at Japanese arts, but "for the sake of convenience" and general understanding I tend to use a more usual interpretation of "Koryu", that is, I use that expression for styles founded prior to the Meiji-restoration of 1867/68.

Passing remark: I personally would find it more appropriate not only to distinguish between Koryu and Gendai Budo, but to make one more distinction at least. To describe it, and also "for the sake of convenience", I will now use expressions like that normally meant to categorize Nihonto from different periods (two of them I've never seen used in coherence with schools of "Japanese martial arts", so please excuse a possible "misuse") : That would make "Koryu" styles and schools founded prior to the Tokugawa Shogunate (for strictly practical purposes, I guess, and mostly if not always being what is called "Sogo Budo", meaning a "complete system", teaching several arts), something like "Shinryu" for those styles founded from the beginning of the Edo period until 1867/68 (that type may include other, more "philosophical" meanings, I assume, and may teach only one art), and finally "Shinshinryu" for every school founded after that time (which may include further aspects, like that of "western sports" and competition as a goal in itself, not as a means to add certain forms of training and a sort of "proof" of a school's effectiveness, and which more often than not teach only one art). Regarding the usual interpretation mentioned earlier, I think it would fit better to indicate a certain separation between "Kobudo" and "Gendai Budo". But that's only my "private concept" to see the matter.
Originally posted by johan smits: The first teachers did teach koryu jujutsu for a part. Tenjin Shin'yo ryu; Yoshin ryu and Ryoi Shinto ryu were three systems which were taught.
However these first teachers did not transmit the complete systems. What they taught was mainly, part of the syllabus of their ryu, for self-defense. They named it jujutsu and they graded their pupils who also used the name jujutsu. ... Fairly soon after jujutsu had been "established" another system came to the West. Judo, well defined, a good theory based on a sound system and explained in a way westerners could understand. Let's not forget well organized and with a lot of publicity. I think, Kano Shihan's Kodokan Judo was sometimes, and at some places even the first and main source for what came to the west. However, the distinction seems to not have been as strict at that times, and even Kodokan teachers often used Jiu-Jitsu, Ju-Jitsu or Ju-Jutsu to describe the art. Additionally, Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu may have had some impact (see the book "Complete Kano Jiu-Jitsu" by Hancock/Higashi).

In Austria, at least, as can be seen in several early books on the subject, sometimes the practice of self-defense was called "Jiu-Jitsu", and the competitions were regarded as "Judo". An episode: In Germany, an editor of a newspaper wrote in a letter to one of the Jiu-Jitsu practitioners: "We can not publish anything on Jiu-Jitsu in our sports-section, as we don't regard Jiu-Jitsu as sport." In a historical sense, he was right, wasn't he? Other people, of course, regarded Jiu-Jitsu as self-defense and sport. However, a strict distinction between Judo and Jiu-Jitsu wasn't very widespread before WWII, in this part of the world, I guess.

Different types of "westernized Jiu Jitsu":

Firstly, you have the teachings that arrived in the west at the beginning of the last century, and what emerged from them in the past 100 years or so, heavily influenced by early Kodokan Judo. I would classify a lot of what is taught in Austria under the name of "Jiu Jitsu" into that category, as well as what is called "Brasilian Jiu Jitsu" today, for example. At a different level and degree of "westernization", even systems like Danzan Ryu may be included, if it isn't seen as a category on it's own, as well as offsprings like Wally Jay's "Small Circle Jujitsu". I don't know, if not even "traditional" westernized Jiu Jitsu would be a good term to describe that types, which I consider "legitimate" westernized Jiu Jitsu.

Then there are systems, that were later developed, using parts and techniques from the systems mentioned above, and mixed with techniques from Kodokan Judo, Aikido and different Karate systems. What is taught in Germany under the name of "Ju-Jutsu" since the 1960's fits into that category to a wide extent, in my opinion. I think of those styles as still legitimate "westernized Jujutsu", and only have problems with the usage of the term "Ryu" by some of them.

Number three are systems, founded by "teachers" of other (mostly P/K) arts, which included very few, and poorly executed Judo or Aikido techniques and jumped onto the Jiu Jitsu bandwagon during the 1990's. Sometimes not even the arts forming the bases of such systems are of (direct) Japanese origin. Herewith I have big problems, regarding legitimacy.

The forth type are recently founded styles, with roots in Japanese Gendai Jujutsu. The future will tell, how they will develop. As an example I offer the "offsprings" of Hakko Ryu, as there are Hakko Denshin Ryu (founded by LaMonica Sensei and Garcia Sensei, both Menkyo Kaiden San Dai Kichu of Hakko Ryu), and Chi Ryu (founded by Bernaschewice Sensei, student of Garcia Sensei). While the use of "Ryu" by this styles may be seen as problematic by some, I think that systems are very close to their Japanese roots (especially Hakko Denshin Ryu, with the connection to Irie Sensei in Omiya); At the moment, I wouldn't call it "westernized Jujutsu", and mentioned it only for the sake of completeness. I don't know for sure if styles of this type, but with roots in Koryu Jujutsu, are in existence already.

Collective designation vs. well defined, specific art:

The term Jujutsu, to the best of my knowledge, came into existence as a collective designation for methodes of close combat during the Edo-period. Most schools used different terms to describe that part of their syllabus. That may be one of the problems with the "identity" of "westernized" Jujutsu, where the term is used to describe "one system", despite of the fact which kind of very different doctrines are taught under that term.

In that historical coherence, the idea of an "open system, sort of anything goes", that Johan mentioned makes sense, IMHO. When you look at the wide variety of arts the original collective designation comprised, it's the most understandable concept, when the term is used to describe one ("open") system. If you want to describe a (your?) specific style within that "open system", it is neccessary to name it somehow, or nobody will know exactly, what you are talking about (but please refrain from calling it XXXX-Ryu, if possible).

Within that dilemma we encounter both, a positive and a negative aspect of the whole concept, IMHO: the idea of an "open system" may provide one to develop a system of self-defense, and, to a lesser degree, a system for being successful at certain types of competitions, that is very well suited to one's personal conditions and strong points, and, of course, personal interpretations (like my own) of what "Budo" means are also easy to fit in. On the other hand, there are obvious dangers with everybody using the term at his own discretion.
Originally posted by Neil Hawkins: This is what some people have tried to do, they are taking the new paint, be it judo, aikido, karate or what-ever and are trying to add other bits and arrive back at the original jujutsu. You cannot reverse engineer like that. There is nothing wrong with their ystem, but it is not jujutsu. Taking into account what I've said so far, and while I agree that the result of those efforts aren't "original" Jujutsu per se, I find it a little bit to strong to deny them the right to be called Jujutsu at all. I would, at most, do that regarding styles I mentioned as "number three systems" earlier.
Originally posted by Rob Wallis: In some ways this will be a positive thing ,rediscovering roots and looking for some of the links to the past can be a wonderful thing. I agree, and while it isn't possible to "reverse engineer" to arrive at "classical" Jujutsu (I think the term "classical" describes better what is meant, than words like "traditional" or "original" would), I believe it is possible to "re-" introduce some (not so technical) aspects of Edo period Kobudo, may be like they were re-interpreted in "original" Japanese Gendai Budo (without the aspect of competition overwhelming everything else, that is) into westernized arts.

In my case, the Jiu Jitsu which I encountered in 1970 was mainly sport-oriented. Thus, when I commenced training in Goju Ryu Karatedo two or three years later, it was the first time that I was exposed to a certain amount of Japanese Culture (and Budo) within an art, which I found interesting and which made me search, talk and read. Of course, as we all know very well, Karate is an own category, and when I started to train in Harada Sensei's Jigen Ryu, another level and other aspects, so far only "experienced" in an academical sense, occured. I try to include a lot of that into my practice of "westernized Jiu Jitsu" as well. Of course, that doesn't make it "classical" or even "modern" "Japanese" Jujutsu. But I think it can be categorized as "traditional (westernized) Jujutsu".

So, I think, while "westernized Jiu Jitsu" in general has big advantages regarding variety and adaptability (think of "Ju" !!), today it mostly concerns self-defense and sport, not neccessarily in that order.

The big shortcoming of most of these systems, as I see it, is the lack of the "Budo" - concept, including historical, cultural and mental aspects, similar to what happens recently to several Gendai Budo in Japan as well as abroad. Regarding that aspects, we can learn a lot from Koryu, especially if we connect that knowledge with the original teachings and ideas of the "founders" of arts like Judo, Aikido and even (Japanese) Karate. This may fill a big gap, IMHO, for people interested in more than only self-defence or sports.

So, if you want to learn self-defence, some of the "westernized Jiu Jitsu" systems, as they are thaught today, may be good for you.

If you want sport (including the western "Fit & Fun" philosophy), find other systems of "westernized Jiu Jitsu", or try something like Kendo, Judo or Karate, as practiced widely today.

If you are interested in Budo (including more "eastern" type of philosophies) in general, perhaps Aikido, Kyudo or Iaido (the styles without competition) may fit your demand.

If you want to experience all or most of the above, try several arts or find one of the few teachers, that try to cover most of that aspects with their teachings, be it in a ("Japanese") Gendai Budo or in a "westernized Jiu Jitsu" system.

If you want Koryu Budo/Bujutsu of course, you only will be satisfied with joining a legitimate Koryu, however demanding that may be. There is no substitute for that.

If you want to simply do something connected with what I call "pseudo-asiatic mumbo-jumbo", then you are really lucky: you will find lots of that, sold under every thinkable name.

Regards,
Robert

johan smits
8th March 2001, 20:55
Hi Robert,

Good of you to join us in this topic, we can do with a bit of feedback and you have given plenty.

Here goes:

About the date for koryu, yes you're right I just used the dates as an example but I believe 1867/68 is the date generally accepted.

Dividing jujutsu in three forms is just to keep it easy (true you can distinguish into more forms but I wanted to keep that for later).

Koryu jujutsu and modern Japanese jujutsu don't lack identity as westernized jujutsu does in my view, so both these forms can later on be used to come to a (more or less) definition of what jujutsu should be.
But this may be a bit premature and is maybe something for later.

About Kodokan judo being the first and in some places even the main source for what came to the West.
Yes, I think you're right and also about the Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu. I believe THR had a lot of influence in Austria and Germany.
You can see Kodokan Judo as formulated by Jigoro Kano as a "national form"and as such a standardized form of jujutsu. This makes sense because as you say the distinction between judo and jujutsu was not very strict before WWII.

I am aware of Brazilian jujutsu and Danzan Ryu but kept them out of the discussion because they, at least as I see it, do not suffer from lack of identity.

You mentioned the fact that I used the term "open system" and I did, however I feel I should explain that I am not in favor of this. It has been used a lot by people with the result that jujutsu in the West has become very polluted.

Looking for my roots? No not really. I know where my roots are. Looking for a way to make westernized jujutsu stronger; better; more solid?

Yes I guess so.

Now I do not think westernized jujutsu can be turned into koryu jujutsu, nor should it be tried.


Remember the paint, you can never get the original back and that's true.
They try and presto as you mentioned "pseudo-asiatic mumbo jumbo". People calling me Sensei in the supermarket and asking me "Mastah shall aibeetimup?"

What do you think would the term "authenticity" fit into this discussion about westernized jujutsu and it's identity?

Best,

Johan

Robert Reinberger
9th March 2001, 09:39
Originally posted by johan smits:
You mentioned the fact that I used the term "open system" and I did, however I feel I should explain that I am not in favor of this. It has been used a lot by people with the result that jujutsu in the West has become very polluted.Johan, would you give some examples of what should be excluded? I would be interested in your opinion here.
Looking for my roots? No not really. I know where my roots are. Looking for a way to make westernized jujutsu stronger; better; more solid?

Yes I guess so.Johan, I would also be interested in hearing about what you consider your roots in that coherence. Also, could you please explain what you mean with "stronger; better; more solid"? I think that sentence might be read in very different ways. And do you mean techniques (you wrote about "westernized jujutsu" per se)?
What do you think would the term "authenticity" fit into this discussion about westernized jujutsu and it's identity?Perhaps, I don't know. When I use this word related to Jujutsu, I normally apply it to Japanese Jujutsu (as opposed to westernized styles), but maybe that's not a correct restriction.

Regards,
Robert

Neil Hawkins
9th March 2001, 10:55
Robert

I have no problem with people calling a style jujutsu, if it has strong roots in traditional Japanese styles. However there are many styles out there that have no links to any form of jujutsu, teaching a combination of karate and grappling. These, I don't think should use the word jujutsu.

I try and steer away from the use of the word 'koryu', I prefer traditional jujutsu and modern jujutsu. Traditional refers to all Japanese based styles modelled on older ryu, regardless of their actual age. Modern jujutsu are the ones that don't have direct links to Japan, but still emulate the methods of the older schools.

The reasons for my distinction, are primarily twofold. First, it is the nature of combative engagements to change over time, fighting styles change, weapons improve or become more readily available and so on. Jujutsu styles should evolve and adapt to encompass these changes. They should not lose sight of the core principles of the style, but techniques must be added to meet the changing circumstances.

This evolution is sometimes frowned upon by 'koryu purists', who believe that any changes detract from the original form.

The second major reason for my distinction is that many of the newer styles of jujutsu have very strong ties to old styles. Wally Jay is one example, his style is a modern one and a western one, he originally studied Danzan Ryu, which is also a chronologically new style. But Small Circle has much in common with many much older styles and to compare it with some of the other styles out there does it a great disservice. I would call it traditional, because that is the way it was developed and taught.

But when it comes down to it, these labels are all subjective. I don't like to generalise (though I seem to do it a lot here :D), I prefer to judge each style I see on its merits, and its students. As my grandmother used to say, "the truth is in the pudding."

Regards

Neil

johan smits
9th March 2001, 11:01
Hi Robert,

I guess it is getting a little bit more difficult from here on.

In a very strict sense I think westernized jujutsu should refrain from influences which do not have a certain Japanese heritage and it should also keep away from systems (these maybe Japanese) which do not share similar motion patterns.
For example: Balisong knife techniques; Win chun straight punches, escrima stickfighting or Goju ryu karate techniques, etc. Do not belong to westernized jujutsu. There is nothing wrong with those systems, far from it!
They just don't belong to (westernized) jujutsu. They should not be a part of it.
Off course you can (and even must) experiment how jujutsu works with/against these styles that's a different matter. Jujutsu techniques against bicycle-chains and baseballbats, that is realistic so give it a try but don't make it part of the curriculum.
Western boxing, should we experiment with it? Oh yes absolutely, should it be a part of westernized jujutsu? Belong to the jujutsucurriculum? I don't think so, a totaly different theory, different way of moving, does it fit into the system without disrupting some essentials which belong to the system? In my opinion not.

Looking for my roots? I should have explained more clearly. Off course the roots of westernized jujutsu are to be found in koryu jujutsu. What I mean is that I am not trying to change westernized jujutsu into koryu jujutsu. They are two separate systems (you can't see koryu jujutsu as one system I know but for the sake of convenience), and that is ok. It is even good, we should not try to become koryu that would be impossible and meaningless.

With stronger; better; more solid I mean we should guard the curriculum of westernized jujutsu more carefully and make sure that the changes which are going to come to westernized jujutsu have a background in Japanese jujutsu and not in other (in themselves sound) systems.

It this case it is a bit strange to say but "foreign" influences (non-Japanese/ non-jujutsu) should not become part of the core of westernized jujutsu.

Can koryu jujutsu have a beneficial influence on westernized jujutsu? Yes, in my opinion it can.

Your remark about authenticity is right on the spot!

To strengthen the identity (or give it a new; more recognizable identity) of westernized jujutsu we should look for authenticity. That's to be found in koryu jujutsu and, as you call it, gendai jujutsu (modern Japanese jujutsu).
The next question I guess is what are the options to achieve this?

Regards,

Johan

9th March 2001, 15:50
Guys,

This is an interesting discussion on a difficult and controversal subject. My sensei, Takamura Yukiyoshi was the subject of a fascinating interview concerning this. I think you would enjoy it very much. It is very thought provoking. You can access it at:

http://www.aikidojournal.com/articles/ajInterviews/YukiyoshiTakamura.asp

johan smits
9th March 2001, 18:41
Hello Mr. Threadgill,

Thank you for your contribution. I have read the interview with Takamura Sensei. I think that Takamura Sensei gives a perfect example of how jujutsu (koryu jujutsu) can adapt to changing circumstances. Keeping a style, school alive in a different time and age. He also gives us an example by showing us how a true master can be honest. In my opinion your Sensei was a truly remarkable man.

I guess you are eminently qualified to give us examples of how a traditional jujutsu school has coped with a changing time and environment.
I am not sure though if I can ask you because I am not aware of the policy of your Ryu concerning sharing information with people outside the school.

I have quite a few questions I would like to ask you on the subject of changes within Takamura Sensei's school.

Can you let me know if that's ok?

If it is ok it would be handy to have a general outline of the Ryu, much as Meik Skoss gives from the Tenjin Shinyo Ryu on page 132 of Koryu Bujutsu, classical warrior traditions of Japan.
If it's not possible, it cannot be helped and it's our loss.

Best Regards,

Johan Smits

johan smits
9th March 2001, 19:07
Hello Neil,

You wrote:

"Jujutsu styles should evolve and adapt to encompass these changes. They should not lose sight of the core principles of the style, but techniques must be added to meet the changing circumstances."

This is, I think, a most important point in the discussion.

Techniques should be adapted, yes. Left out (no longer practised) maybe. Techniques should be added, I don't know.
Could you give some examples?

Best,

Johan

9th March 2001, 23:55
Mr Smits,

Generally I can discuss the topic you are curious about without many limitations, however often it is quite difficult for me to accurately explain this topic in words that do it justice.

I would be happy to answer any questions I can. If the questions are off limits, I'll say so. If I don't know the answer I won't B.S. you... I'll say "I Don't know." If the question is very complex please be patient in that it may take me some time to formulate an articulate answer.

Respectfully,

Toby Threadgill

Rob
10th March 2001, 09:12
Setting aside traditional Jiu Jitsu for a second. It seems to me that really there are two types of Western Jiu Jitsu regardless of their age.

1) A style founded or taught primarily by westerners who had previously trained extensively in a traditional ryu. The art continues to be based on concepts which are then expressed in techniques. As the art adapts to the different requirements of a different time and culture the techniques may change but the fundamental concepts remain the same. Often the changes are in teaching style and the dropping of some elements of the curriculum which are not felt to be relevent to a modern society.

2) 'Styles' which are primarily a collection of techniques often from different sources and sometimes added to another art.

In my opinion whilst the former styles perhaps don't have a specific techinique for certain situations they do contain the principles which when understood allow you to deal with any situation. The latter arts are doomed to constantly be playing catch up. It's no good knowing 100 techniques if there are 101 different types of attacks.

Without knowing the backgrounds of these arts they are often difficult to tell apart. Many of 'type 1' arts are now taught in a very westernised manner making them indistinguishable at a casual level from type 2.

I think as the 'ko-ryu' becomes the latest thing is that some styles won't change a thing being quite happy as they are. Some of the technique based arts will go to a few seminars and suddenly bolt on some Aki- Jiu Jitsu or Sword work etc. But many of the more concept based arts may perhaps evolve backwards and rediscover some of the more esotoric weapons and teaching weapons in a bid to better pass on the fundamental concepts upon which their art is based.

johan smits
10th March 2001, 14:15
Mr. Threadgill,


Thank you very much, any input we can get from you is much appreciated.

First a general remark.

I would like to state that I consider the Ryu as an entity as being perfect in itself.

Any questions put here are to be abel to understand the point of view of a masterteacher from Japan who found himself and his Ryu in a different environment than the environment he was brought up in and in which his Ryu came into existence.
This all in the hope we can learn something from it.

Therefore any answers provided are to be used to learn from and are not open to debate!

Here goes:


- Any changes the Ryu underwent, were these on a technical level (did techniques change) or were changes also on a more fundamental level? (See also the last question).

- Were parts of the curriculum changed? If so which parts?

- Was the order in which students were taught kata or groups of kata changed?

- Were kata or groups of kata left out? For instance were techniques in idori (seated techniques) and techniques against swords part of the original system? If so were these maintained in the West or were these no longer practiced? What was the motivation to do so?

- Has the didactic system and the way of teaching been altered or adapted?

- Was kuatsu (first aid) part of the original curriculum? If so was this maintained or altered?


- Has anything been added to the theory and curriculum of the Ryu and how does this relate to the original theory of the Ryu? And what has been added?

- Would you say the core of the Ryu (main theory; characteristics; feeling) has been changed or has been adapted after being taught for a longer period in the West?
Or would you say that after being out of the culture of origin for a longer period, for the Ryu, traditional parts became more important?

There are some more questions I would like to ask, these are more specific and I think do not belong to this discussion properly so for now this is all.

If you would like to rephrase any question put here in order to be abel to provide an answer please do so.

Best Regards,

Johan Smits

johan smits
10th March 2001, 14:36
Hi Robert,


I agree with you. The "type 1"arts are, at least in my opinion, the "original westernized"jujutsu.
The "type 2" arts are where the problem with the name to be used begins.
Should it be called jujutsu? Very difficult, a lot of pro's a lot of contra's.
That is a part of the discussion I would like to skip if possible because I feel that will make things even more complicated.

And you are right when you say some of the styles won't change a thing as koryu becomes the latest thing.

It is just that I think to be abel to distinguish between the "type 1 and type 2" arts it would be best if westernized jujutsu would have a stronger identity; a more recognizable identity. Not just for the practitioners or teachers but also for the general public.

I must say that for me the logical place to look for such an identity seems to be the koryu- and shinryu jujutsu.

What and where becomes more clear I guess. It is the "how" which concerns me now (rhyme not intended).

Best,

Johan

Robert Reinberger
10th March 2001, 15:31
Mr Threadgill,

I also want to thank you for providing the link. This interwiew is really a great source, IMHO. And I'm definitely interested in the subject (Takamura-ha Shindo Yoshin Ryu, that is) being discussed.

Johan, Mr. Threadgill, et al,

however, I'm not sure if this style is what I would call "westernized" Jujutsu. Although I know very little about that style, with reference to it's history discussed in the interview mentioned already, I would think of it as "Japanese" Jujutsu, altered and adapted (to the present as well as to the West) by a Japanese teacher who first had studied the original art to an extent, that he was considered to be able to teach it.

Is that assumption correct, or is it considered to be one type of "westernized Jujutsu" (In my personal view, it's not even what I called "number 4 - types" earlier, but still "(authentic) (modern) Japanese Jujutsu")?

Regards,
Robert

johan smits
10th March 2001, 20:09
Hi Robert,


You are right. The style is absolutely not "westernized jujutsu" as we use the term for this discussion.
Shindo Yoshin Ryu is a koryu and in this case the Shindo Yoshin Ryu as taught by the Takamura family.
Actually Toby Threadgill is the person to answer this
and not me.

This is however a unique chance to gain insights into a process which lies at the root of this whole discussion, only approached from the other side.

Here we do not deal with parts of a system, from the beginning selected to fit into a foreign culture. Here we have a system as a whole introduced into another culture. Any changes/adaptations were made by a masterteacher who was molding his family art to fit into changes he found on his way.

I hope Toby Threadgill can work with the questions I posted. I you know any other/better questions.

For now.

Best,

Johan

Neil Hawkins
11th March 2001, 23:24
The sort of evolution or adaptation I am talking about can be illustrated fairly simply. The style I practice (Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu) has a number of defences against a spear, they are not terribly relevent in today's society, however, with very minor modification they are very good defenses against a rifle and bayonet.

That was until rifles became shorter (like the HK MP5 or the Steyr) now the techniques need to be modified again to suit the changes in weapons.

Another example are knife defenses. Original Japanese styles utilised strong, straight thrusts, as these were required to penetrate the armour worn by Samurai. As the wearing of armour declined knife attacks became slashes. Now-a-days with the popularity of FMA the knife attacks are extremely quick and fluid, slashing on the forehand and the backhand from many different angles. Not many "jujutsu" styles incorporate effective defenses against this type of attack. They should.

Jujutsu is an extremely practical style that will never be obsolete, you always have your hands and feet with you, so I believe that the styles should be able to adapt, provided the core principles remain intact. The essence of the school are the basics, take those building blocks and work with them.

Of course there is a proviso, only people who have attained the highest levels of study in the art should be allowed to change the art. You must have a complete understanding of the why's and the how's before you can adapt.

The problem arises when people who don't have that level of understanding try to change or add techniques, this takes us back to the whole validity arguement.

Regards

Neil

johan smits
12th March 2001, 10:47
Hi Neil,

You wrote:

" ...only people who have attained the highest levels of study in the art should be allowed to change the art. You must have a complete understanding of the why's and how's before you can adapt."

I agree totally with that.

You give a beautiful example about the spear, which fit's very well into this discussion.

You wrote:

"The style I practice (Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu) has a number of defences against a spear, they are not terribly relevant in today's society, however with very minor modification they are very good defenses against a rifle and bayonet."

Even if they are not terribly relevant in today's society, a spear is still a formidable weapon.
But apart from that, a set of techniques which teaches effective defenses against a spear can contribute a lot to the identity of the style. It is very recognizable maybe even unique to the style (I wouldn't know).

Now I am not saying these techniques should be practiced with the identity of the style as the main reason to do so.
But I do believe it is a valid argument.

Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu looks like an interesting style to me. Is there information available on the style?

Best Regards,

Johan

johan smits
12th March 2001, 13:50
Neil,

Just a few words, to prevent any misunderstanding.
In my previous post I did not mean to imply that Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu is lacking identity.
Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu does not fall in the category "westernized jujutsu" as I use the term in this discussion.
I do not know if THR practitioners qualify their ryu as koryu but that's a different matter and it's not for me to vent an opinion on.
What I did mean to say is that, without becoming museumpieces, jujutsu could and (in my opinion) should use the older,available parts of their curriculum to strengthen their identity.


Some westernized styles try to do this by adding the Kime no Kata of Kodokan Judo to their repertoire. Some practice only the tachi waza or tachiai (standing) part of it omitting the idori (seated) techniques.
Although I can understand the reason behind making Kime no Kata part of a westernized system, as far as it concerns identity, I never understood why no style uses the Koshiki No Kata of Kodokan Judo for this purpose.

Best,

Johan

Robert Reinberger
12th March 2001, 20:23
Johan,

please excuse my interruption. I know that the discussion of this topic has become rather technical. But while technical aspects are certainly to be considered, I still see the real shortcomings of some westernized Jujutsu at other levels.

Accidentally today, a letter written by someone, who considers himself as one of the "younger generation - Yudansha" (or, I suppose strongly, as a "younger generation master"), and who belongs to a group that had recently changed sides in a struggle between organizations, was brought to my attention.

The drift of what he wrote was:

"Why are there new clubs, which increase their membership in one year from 0 to 100?" .....
"In Canada there are whole chains of Dojo with more than 500 practitioners per Dojo" ....

Obviously he don't understand, that while McDonalds is a successful business, not everybody wants to live on Hamburger only, and that quantity isn't everything (that mentioned group designates everybody from Shodan on as "Sensei", and awards Japanese titles to their members, which than sign their letters and e-mails with "Sensei X", "Renshi Y" and "Kyoshi Z", for example).

Then he continues, talking about Jujutsu as a tree with different branches, and recommends "jumping from branch to branch to get a better idea of the whole thing. While I can understand that point of view, I'm afraid that doesn't fit to the usual mindset of someone practicing a Koryu. And that mindset is equally justified, to say the least, IMHO.

But then the real error became apparent: He narrated about a recent experience as an examiner, rather ironically:

"After the test, at a smalltalk he (the examinee) said: 'I don't consider Jujutsu being a sport, for me it is a martial art.' That opened a different perspective for me. A saw a new branch of the tree."

Do you see the real irony that lies herein? An examinee had to tell the examiner about his own art! And that examiner really and still considers westernized, McDojo, sport, tournament and fit & fun Jujutsu to be the stem (regardless of the different original meaning in Japan as well as in my country, BTW), and every other aspect as "just a new branch"!

That is why I believe, the real shortcoming of westernized Jujutsu often is attitude, understanding, mindset and the amount of ignorance much more than any technical lack. And in the special case I mentioned, there also is no shortage of identity. But the"felt" identity seems to be ruther curious, to put it cautious.

Regards,
Robert

12th March 2001, 23:12
Johan,


Okay.... This is complicated but here goes. Takamura Sensei saw the future of his families martial traditions dying off if they were not found to be of real value to the society at large. Being a “martial” artist he did not wish to see the art become a spiritual vehicle or sport as many of these were already in existance and finely adapted to that purpose. He also did not wish to see his art become a lifeless museum piece for the historically curious . He truly believed his ancestors were watching and witness to his actions. It was ultimately their traditions he was entrusted to maintain in the changing landscape following WW2. He took this obligation very seriously and did not make changes to the mokuroku without very serious consideration.

On Changes.

A common misconception is that a “ryu” is a static thing or entity that has somehow found a magic combination of specific unchanging elements. This is crazy if you think about it. Successful ryu changed all the time but only changed what needed to be changed. They had to change because if they didn’t, another ryu would discover an inherent weakness and exploit it. The challenge confronted in any change is continuously and dispassionately evaluating what needs to be changed and what needs to be kept. This happens in the military all the time. Too much change and the cohesive glue that holds effectiveness together is lost. Too little change and doctrine becomes an antiquated vessle romantically holding onto outmoded secrets as if they were still applicable. For a ryu to truly remain alive it must be challenged and adapt to the task set before it. We humans are creatures of habit and perhaps even more so when set within the context of a Japanese society or martial tradition. As painful as this truth is, we must all adapt if we intend to remain effective. It is the way of our environment.

A common problem we see as modern martial artists is changing for the heck of it , or without the proper understanding of the underlying principles of why we do what we do. You see this all the time when some Joe Blow starts Mamma-Yama ryu after ten years of training in 9 different arts. He will probably market himself as a "master" having “broad experience” when he really has broadly shallow understanding, if he has any understanding at all. This is blazing through Japanese martial arts today and is a great example of the opposite problem of rigid traditionalism. It takes an amazing amount of study and depth to see when and what change should be considered, if any. Takamura Sensei trained over 40 years and held a Menkyo Kaiden before he reluctantly considered the changes he made to the SYR mokuroku and then intensely tested and evaluated these changes for 5 years before instituting them.

So...

Johan, many of your questions overlap in great part so I am going to attempt to answer them by lumping some of them into groups.


-Any changes the Ryu underwent, were these on a technical level (did techniques change) or were changes also on a more fundamental level? (See also the last question).

- Were parts of the curriculum changed? If so which parts?

- Was the order in which students were taught kata or groups of kata changed?


- Were kata or groups of kata left out? For instance were techniques in idori (seated techniques) and techniques against swords part of the original system? If so were these maintained in the West or were these no longer practiced? What was the motivation to do so?

______________________________________________________________________________

The changes were made mostly on a technical level. Many threats existing in the modern environment had changed so some techniques were altered to most effectively address these changes. Others were found technically applicable and kept entirely in tact.

Specifically the entire Shoden Idori & Chuden Idori syllabus was significantly altered due to the fact that it was not deemed practical in the present environment. What Idori was retained was kept as a training tool for proper SYR concepts and form instead of actual application. Most of the Tachiai syllabus was kept but occasionally altered or modified similarly. All of the Atemi / Ratai Dori was kept and actually expanded. Many weapon applications were kept as training tools, especially for chemical stress conditioning which Takamura felt was extremely important. A solo jyo kata was created with the help of Takagi Iso Sensei based partly on Shindo Muso ryu to add a basic level of familiarity with weapons to precede the more challenging and intricate set of uchitachi/shitachi kata.

Perhaps a better example of the changes would be explained this way. Takamura Sensei And Koizumi Sensei incorporated classical jujutsu techniques and concepts against modern boxing handwork and karate/kickboxing leg attacks. Tanto disarms and applications are greatly stressed over the katana or wakazashi. A limited hojo syllabus was retained as optional training. The physiology of chemical stress was integrated into the training in a way unneeded prior to the teaching of men or especially women unaccustomed to harsh physical contact.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


- Has the didactic system and the way of teaching been altered or adapted?

______________________________________________________________________________

Yes. There is a much greater reliance on freestyle application including unorthodox attacks and less on the stylized performance of kata. (I know..This makes some traditionalists crazy.) Jujutsu concepts and principles are taught at an earlier stage in learning. By the time you attain a Chuden Menkyo you will have a much more significant understanding of SYR Ura Waza. Prior to this change some of these were only taught under Joden Gokui / Ura Waza.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Was kuatsu (first aid) part of the original curriculum? If so was this maintained or altered?

_____________________________________________________________________________

Yes & Yes, the Kappo has been maintained but is only taught at Joden. Other resusitation and first aid has been added to the curriculum at the Chuden Level.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

- Has anything been added to the theory and curriculum of the Ryu and how does this relate to the original theory of the Ryu? And what has been added?

______________________________________________________________________________

I don’t think it would be correct to say that many theories have been added as much as expanded while others have become less emphasized. Ki has definitely been less emphasized after being re-evaluated within the framework of modern scientific understanding. Although the concept of Ki is ocassionally addressed it is never associated with mysticism or such. It is more appropriately explained as intent and perception of intent. Kiai is closely associated with it in SYR as there are specific kiai used to affect and manipulate an opponents ki. Some of these concepts were added from either Shinkage ryu or Jikishinkage ryu, both of which were studied by Takamura’s grandfather Shigeta. There is also a series of concepts in the Joden Gokui / Ura Waza very similar to “aiki”. It is possible that some of these concepts were expanded after Shigeta Ohbata’s association with Yoshida Kotaro . Several techniques from Yoshida Kotaro / Yanagi ryu & Daito ryu were added into the syllabus and are still recognized as such. These waza were probably added early in the 20th century. Years later these techniques led Takamura Sensei to initatiate his friendship with Don Angier, inheritor of Yoshida Kotaro’s martial traditions . I’m in a unique situation to recognized these as I study Yanagi ryu as well.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


- Would you say the core of the Ryu (main theory; characteristics; feeling) has been changed or has been adapted after being taught for a longer period in the West?
Or would you say that after being out of the culture of origin for a longer period, for

the Ryu, traditional parts became more important?

______________________________________________________________________________

Thats a hard question for me to understand but I’ll take a stab at it. I dont think the core of the ryu has changed much but that depends on how you define “the core”. Another thing that makes this question difficult is defining “changed” from when. Very often people have a romantic notion of what Japanese society is like, was like, and how it affects a martial ryu. They get overly caught up
in the cultural trappings of Japanese martial arts and then neglect what is truly martial or else, become “Nippon Snobs”. The problem with this notion is that a fuedal society bore the arts like Yoshin Koryu. Modern Japanese society for all it’s elevation of tradition is nothing like fuedal Japan or even more so, Warring States Era Japan. It was Takamura Sensei’s opinion that what many westerners associate as being “authentic” Japaneseness in koryu , is not authentic at all. Many of these cultural trappings we like to think of as having originally existed as part of the ryu were not part of the ryu when it was founded. They were added later due to changing societal realities. That does not mean that these Japanese cultural trappings are bad or phoney or shouldn't be adhered to but just they were not originally part of the ryu’s formation and should not be overly revered . One set of Japanese cultural trappings has been substituted by another more modern set and this will probably happen again.

If it does, will it destroy the arts character and appeal? Tough thing to ponder... huh...

Should Japanese Budo remain distinctly Japanese? I think so.... definitely. Thats why I built a very traditional Japanese dojo and exercise traditional decorum in my dojo. The problem facing people like myself and to a much greater degree the hardcore Koryu guys like Meik Skoss, Ellis Amdur and Dave Lowry is.....what will “Japaneseness” become in the years ahead. What will Japan be like in the future. Will the youth of Japan discard her traditions wholesale in the face of rampant globalization. Will Japaneseness in koryu become so foreign that the appeal of it is totally lost and as a result dies.

I’m sure this question nags them everyday. It does me.

The Takamura ryuha walks a fine line trying to keep one foot in the present and one in the past without neglecting either. Some would say that by adapting the mokuroku Takamura Sensei chose to neglect both. That is a debate I will not enter into as my allegiance and obligation is to him and his decision. What was important to him is that his traditions not die but live and adapt to their environment so they are found valuable. He told me once that he would rather his families traditions die than be put on display like a dead corpse in a museum. (Martial robots peforming kata with no real spirit or the ability to defend themselves against a genuine attack made him absolutely crazy ! “Look at them” he would say...they are walking dead. If I were to let out a kiai they would all die of a heart attack!)

If the Takamura ryuha does die, it will finally die from the inability or unwillingness to adapt fast enough to keep up with a society moving too fast for its own damn good instead of adapting to quickly.

Too bad for us.


(I hope I sort of answered your questions)


Tobs

Neil Hawkins
12th March 2001, 23:43
Johan

We do still teach traditional weapons, as traditional weapons, but this is usually only done at a senior level. You learn the traditional application and then any variations that have been added.

Sometimes in seminars or special classes, lower grades are taught the modern application alone, but it is usually explained that it is an adaptation of something older.

I don't want to start a debate, but I don't really consider THR to be a true Koryu. The purists will argue that the koryu system died with the last Master during the Second World War. My instructor is the only surviving student and did complete the curriculumn, but was not officially named as successor. He has modernised the system somewhat and has added techniques from other styles, but the core principles remain the same as they were taught hundreds of years ago.

There are other discussions about the history of THR here, if you search back.

Toby

Some good points, I like the analogy to the military.

Regards

Neil

Robert Reinberger
13th March 2001, 00:01
Toby,

that was a fascinating addition to the already fascinating interview of your teacher.

Regards,
Robert

johan smits
13th March 2001, 09:01
Hello Robert,

You wrote:

" That is why I believe, the real shortcoming of westernized jujutsu often is attitude,understanding, mindset and the amount of ignorance much more than any technical lack."

You have a very good point there! However the whole identity thing with westernized jujutsu is most easily approached from the technical point of view, I think (at least as a starting point). Actually you can't make a separation in technical / non-technical because these things influence each other but you have to start somewhere.

One of the things that make the identity aspect of westernized jujutsu so difficult is the fact that lack of identity reinforces itself so to speak.

When there is no identity available, or a serious lack of identity, it is very difficult if not impossible to guard against all sorts of unwelcome influences.

In case you have ideas on ways how to tackle what you call the real shortcomings I am very interested to hear about them.


Toby,

Many thanks for the answers. That is quite some input for this topic! It will take a few days to digest but I will get back to you.
Again thank you.




Neil,

You wrote:

" My instructor is the only surviving student and did complete the curriculum, but was not officialy named as a succesor."

If he is the only surviving student, who is going to argue?

But I guess that indeed is another subject.
What may be of interest is to know, what he modernised and which techniques were added from what styles.
And the main point what was his motivation to do so?

Neil Hawkins
14th March 2001, 22:45
Johan

I don't feel qualified to comment on that in public, I have no authority to speak for my instructor or the style.

I will discuss my thought and feelings off-line if you wish, PM me.

Regards

Neil

johan smits
15th March 2001, 20:27
Hi all,

I would have replied sooner but we were having some trouble with the workstation at the office and E-budo could not be reached.

Neil,

I did sent you a pm, don't know if it arrived but I will contact you again, thanks.


Toby,

Again thank you very much for a most informative piece. I consider your post a must for anyone seriously interested in jujutsu whether koryu or westernized.
Actually it should be obligatory reading for anyone teaching the art.

When I wrote a Ryu being an entity an perfect in itself, I should have explained, for me, this includes past as well as future changes.

It does take a lot of courage to admit to ourselves that change is what rules everything including us. Out here alone in the universe we cling to habits; religion; tradition and symbols to find ourselves shelter and security in an ever changing environment.

Instead of using those things (habits; etc) as means to an end somewhere along the way these things became an end in themselves.

About "getting overly caught up in the cultural trappings
of Japanese martial arts..." In some instances people have tried to strengthen the identity of westernized jujutsu by introducing Japanese customs; language; etc (based on their knowledge and even more so on the lack of knowledge of their students) of the Japanese culture.
Most of this is based on lack of knowledge. This will be solved in the end as more quality information gets available to the people.

Westernized jujutsu has always been taught without proper reference to the cultural identity which I think does belong to jujutsu. Not to be used as an end in itself but as a tool to understand why things have developed in a certain way. To understand a system it has to be placed in the proper historical and cultural perspective.
Learning Japanese customs as a Westerner in the West serves me only if I can use it to obtain a better understanding of the art I practice. Otherwise I would be making empty gestures, that is how I see it, but please note I speaking for myself.

You write:

"It takes an amazing amount of study and depth to see when and what change should be considered, if any."

I understand what you are saying and I think you are right. However in relation to westernized jujutsu change is not a matter of choice it is something with which we are confronted. In almost all cases this change is not the result of an amazing amount of study and depth, unfortunately.

There are teachers (I count myself among them) who are truly concerned about the art they practice and who are honest enough to admit that something is lacking: identity.

Thanks again.

Best Regards,

Johan

Mark Jakabcsin
15th March 2001, 21:43
Johan wrote: "Learning Japanese customs as a Westerner in the West serves me only if I can use it to obtain a better understanding of the art I practice. Otherwise I would be making empty gestures, that is how I see it, but please note I speaking for myself. "

Johan,

Could you please give an example or two of how learning Japanese custom gave you a better understanding of the art you practice? Has this learning of custom helped you technically or otherwise? I have been followng this thread with great interest but I am not sure I am really understanding what you are trying to convey with the above statement and hope an example would set me straight. Thanks in advance.

mark

ps: Thanks to everyone participating in a good and interesting thread.

Rob
15th March 2001, 23:42
Mark, I'm sure Johan has lots of examples of how using Japanese customs helps in his understanding of his art, but as I'm here I thought I'd give you a couple that I like..


One is purely a language thing... Sensei, as I understand literally translated is "one who has gone before ".. I make a point of explaining this to my class.. I'm not their 'coach' here to tell them what to do, I'm simply a guy who's been doing it longer who shows them what I know, the learning is up to them.. it's a fine point but it's important I think.

Another perhaps more obvious one is the kneeling bow, in my style we do it in a certain way.. at first people are just taught to do it that way.. as they progress they are shown how kneeling in a particular way helps to ensure that a sword does not bang on the floor etc etc... as they progress further that basic awareness is expanded upon further to help them be aware of everything that there body is doing and also what people around them are doing... all from being taught how to kneel and bow...

Just a couple of what I hope are good examples of how an understanding of the reason and source of some customs helps to a greater understanding of the art.

Rob
15th March 2001, 23:45
Mark, I'm sure Johan has lots of examples of how using Japanese customs helps in his understanding of his art, but as I'm here I thought I'd give you a couple that I like..


One is purely a language thing... Sensei, as I understand literally translated is "one who has gone before ".. I make a point of explaining this to my class.. I'm not their 'coach' here to tell them what to do, I'm simply a guy who's been doing it longer who shows them what I know, the learning is up to them.. it's a fine point but it's important I think.

Another perhaps more obvious one is the kneeling bow, in my style we do it in a certain way.. at first people are just taught to do it that way.. as they progress they are shown how kneeling in a particular way helps to ensure that a sword does not bang on the floor etc etc... as they progress further that basic awareness is expanded upon further to help them be aware of everything that their body is doing and also what people around them are doing... all from being taught how to kneel and bow...

Just a couple of what I hope are good examples of how an understanding of the reason and source of some customs helps to a greater understanding of the art.

johan smits
16th March 2001, 07:55
Hi Mark,

Thanks for your comment.

The examples Robert gave are good ones.

Sitting in seiza is another example. It is a very inconvenient posture to sit in for a longer period of time.
However sitting in seiza is very good to make you aware of your center and your balance.
You can check if your bodyposture is correct by swaying a little bit to the left and right. Any loss of correct body posture (shoulders no longer above hips) will be felt immediately.
You will develop a habit of keeping a correct bodyposture. Keeping a correct bodyposture seems obvious, but it's not. It is something that has to be learned.
A correct bodyposture is essential for executing effective technique.

Another one: when bowing from seiza, keep the neck straight and use your peripheral vision to be aware of the surroundings. This has to do with staying alert.

It has helped me technically but also otherwise.
An example of the latter.
We practice kata from idori. This has helped me very much to understand the restrictions of moving/movements (depending on circumstances off course).

Best Regards,

Johan

johan smits
16th March 2001, 11:17
"East is east and West is West and never the twain shall meet."

Hi all,

I heard my colleague at the office say this. Not an exact quote and I have no idea whom it's from. But it gave me a line to start a most difficult post.

Until now we have mainly been talking about the identity of westernized jujutsu, or the lack of identity or the gruelling state it is in (well so to speak).
I would like to take the discussion one step further and start on what to do about this and how to do this.

It will undoubtedly ruffle some feathers (maybe even quite a lot) and if asked to I am prepared to offer my head, but not before we had a serious and interesting debate on the subject.

Like I said before, the next big influence in westernized jujutsu is, in my opinion, going to be koryu jujutsu.
But who is going to start this?

It is my guess it is not going to be serious koryu jujutsu practitioners, they tend to keep to themselves. It is not going to be serious practitioners of westernized jujutsu, they are not going to teach something they have never learned.
Seems we are out of serious jujutsu practitioners.
Last remaining category: the not-so-serious practitioners of said arts. This is bad, because they don't keep to themselves and they will for sure teach what they themselves never learned.
This is not a good thing.

In my opinion there is an obvious solution.

What needs to be done: fortify the identity of westernized jujutsu without changing the system(s) to much.
In other words: add something.

What should be added? A kata, just as some westernized jujutsu schools use kata from Kodokan Judo for their systems.

In this case a "koryu no kata" could be added. Now I do not mean kata from one specific koryu should be taken. What needs to be done is to develop a "koryu no kata" specially for westernized jujutsu.
As such it would not be koryu jujutsu!
In this kata techniques from several koryu could be used. Or several new forms (not historical) could be created according to the technical criteria of the koryu.

Westernized jujutsu will not change into koryu jujutsu, that's not the objective. But it will have gained a valuable tool to develop itself in the right direction and it will have obtained something that can be used as a core part of it's identity.

Off course this is not as easy as I make it sound and I have just sketched a very general outline of a possible solution.

I am very interested in your opinions and I hope to hear from you.

(Oh yes, WHO should do this? Well the koryu jujutsu practitioners off course, in cooperation with practitioners of westernized jujutsu that is).

Happy chopping,

Johan

Ron Tisdale
16th March 2001, 15:53
"East is east and West is West and never the twain shall meet."

Kippling, Rudyard; I believe....One of my favorite authors as a tyke...

RT

Mark Jakabcsin
16th March 2001, 21:20
"East is east and West is West and never the twain shall meet."

"Kippling, Rudyard; I believe....One of my favorite authors as a tyke... "

I guess he never visited Williamsport, PA for the Little League World Series! :)

mark

robjitsu
17th March 2001, 16:24
I find myself in a similar situation. I've practiced a 'westernized' jj for 15 years and found it to be quite effective for the same reasons you describe. However, I believe there is more out there to be learned from the traditionalists. I started working with an old timer named Tony Sandoval recently and have been pleasantly surprised - a number of odd bits and pieces (of the puzzle) have been clarified through his instruction.

I think the issue of effectiveness has a number of levels - beyond a point a lot of issues become intellectual study with minimal impact on performance.




Originally posted by Rob
It's so rare I' m even remotely qualified to comment on something in e-budo that I couldn't let the opportunity slip by. !!

As a student for 10 odd years and now an instructor in what is undoubtably and unashamedly both a modern and westernised style of Jiu Jitsu I can fully understand the fascination with the Koryu.

I can't speak for the majority but for myself I primarily took up Jiu Jitusu because I wanted to a) be able to defend myself and b) do something 'exotic' !.

As I've progressed and trained I'm convinced that the style I study does teach effective self defence skills (without going into all that that entails here). There are clearly unifying prinicples primarily based on physics and psychology which make the art sometimes brutally effective.

However it does not have a 500 year old history and much of the traditions and more esotoric knowledge have been deliberately dropped..

So I find myself know wondering do I want to teach self defence and effective control and fighting techniques for the next 25 - 30 years or do I want something more ?

And it is that search for something more that has led me to search (so far without success) for an instructor in an older art. I'm not looking for combat effectiveness or self defence what I'm looking for is that mind set, the commitment, the culture if you will that sets anything with a long history apart from something more modern.

These things are hard to describe in words so perhaps a metaphor might better serve... There are some incredible buildings being built today in many ways more efficient and impressive than anything seen before.. but to gaze upon the pyramids will always affect me more not because they are better buildings or even becuase they were built using 'primative' methods but because they have endured .. they have a history..

Just my thoughts, treat them as you will

johan smits
19th March 2001, 07:49
Hi there,

Thanks for the quote. Seems Kippling got it right, looks like East and West are not going to meet.

I guess one part lives under fear of Hachiman and the other part likes fat guys in outrageous colored kimonos wearing red/white obi, doing unbelievable things.

Don't be scared, be brave.

Best,

Johan

johan smits
29th March 2001, 20:21
Hi all,


After waiting for some time I thought I would give it one more try.
I know that the idea of koryu jujutsu in connection with westernized jujutsu is something a bit controversial for a lot of practitioners.
Maybe even more so the suggestion that a koryu kata could be created.
What I find hard to believe is that people have got no opinion on this topic.
As a matter of fact I think I am already familiar with some people's opinions.
But then a discussion board is to discuss with each other so once again everybody is cordially invited to vent their opinion on this subject.

Best,

Johan Smits

Rob
29th March 2001, 20:46
Johan,

I think I understand what you are looking for from this "koryu kata" but there are a number of in my opinion fatal flaws with your suggestion..

1) Which koryu ? there are many different styles of Jiu Jitsu and often with big differences between them

2) Why should they ? I see no benefit to any small family style organisation taking the time to make up a kata for a style to which it is not affiliated.. If you want to learn Koryu Jiu Jitsu then join a ryu !

3) By definition this Kata will be 'bolt on' not springing from the fundamentals of your system of Jiu Jitsu but added in from an outside influence.. I really don't see the benefit..

4) I feel if anything this sort of attempt would simply undermine any credibility that 'westernised systems' have...

Personally I feel the answer is to have confidence and pride in what we do and not attempt to bolt on outside influence.

Respectfully yours

Sheridan
30th March 2001, 00:00
My own training started in a modern jujutsu club. Now that I have access to the Koryu (more than one ryu-ha) I can definately see where you're coming from. I've also argued tradition, authenticity, blaa, blaa, blaa. Many better folks than I are already dealing with that aspect in this thread so I'll just keep my mouth shut. In my own personal comparison though, I see in the koryu a common thread or idea prevalient behind each technique. Ie, I'm doing booga-booga-ryu and know that intimidation is part and parcel of every movement, so if it isn't scary it isn't booga-booga-ryu. The loss of identity may not be found in social or environmental factors, but in the wide divergence of technical aspects used in western jujutsu. Because of seeing multiple ryu-ha in the same day from different people, I can tell each identity from the rest. Even when taught by the same person.

Neil Hawkins
30th March 2001, 01:19
Another factor is degredation.

Other arts (I know I'm going to get slammed for this!) most notably Iaido and Kendo have 'koryu' kata which are supposed to illustrate the origins of the gendai kata they practice, in nearly every instance I've seen these kata have been degraded to the point where they are indistinguishable, different branches of the same school do them differently, let alone different schools.

Judo does have some traditional kata, though these are rarely taught today, and they do illustrate well the origins of that art. They work well because they have been a part of the art since it's inception and are closely linked to the underlying principles that make judo, judo.

The problem with many Western Arts is that they don't have these underlying principles, to add kata would be meaningless to their system. It would be like teaching line dancing to the local Arthur Murray Academy, there may be some benefit to some gifted performers who recognise the elements of timing that may assist in their ballroom steps, but most would see it as an interesting diversion and not take much notice.

I would say though that if you taught line dancing to the Royal Ballet, they would get a lot more out of it. Timing, rythme and balance are essential to all dancers, but those from old traditions understand better how to apply these under different circumstances and are able to distinguish the common threads between traditions and learn from them.

Everything that is taught should aid the students in their understanding of what they are doing. Giving them a 'dictionary' of techniques is of only limited use, teach them the grammar of how the technique works, why it works and when to use it, an they will soon be able to make their own sentences.

Geez, I'm full of analogies today, sorry! :D

Regards

Neil

johan smits
31st March 2001, 10:17
Hi all,

Thanks for your reactions, I really appreciate it. It is a difficult subject but I think it is worthwhile to have this discussion.
Let me first say, as I have done in previous posts, I rank koryu jujutsu and westernized jujutsu as equal and I value them both.
I have been training in jujutsu since 1974, now I would not have stayed at it for such a time if I would not think it worthwhile.


The reason I have started this post is because I have seen (and see) a lot of changes in the practice of jujutsu and with most I am not too happy.
On one side I see people who after a token visit to Japan declare themselves some sort of supreme being (sometimes their pupils do it for them). On the other side I see people who participate in jujutsu championships where points are given using the nomenclature of cardgames. In between all sorts of variations.
I think jujutsu deserves better.

After careful consideration I came to the conclusion (but that’s my conclusion) that westernized jujutsu when compared to other martial arts suffers from a lack of identity.
I think this is one of the main reasons why there is so much uncontrolled growth in westernized jujutsu. The bad thing is that this leaves the art open to whomever wants to benefit from it, usually persons without scruples who are in need of a lot of money.
In the end the art becomes damaged and the earnest practitioners with it.

Why the koryu connection? Well after the seventies with some sort of kung fu/ karate influence, the introduction of ninjutsu weaponry in the eighties, the “exotic arts” of the nineties it looks like now it’s the turn of koryu jujutsu.
In all honesty I don’t think these influences can be stopped.

I think that if it is going to happen then it should be guided by people qualified and capable to do so, and not leave it to people of dubious motives.

Until so far the why.
About the how:

Neil,
You talk about degradation, and I think that is a fair statement where it concerns iaido and kendo, when using martial ability as a criteria (they may slam me also).

In a way a “standard” koryu kata, could indeed fall victim to such a change but not necessarily so. Because such a kata would not become the entire system, it would merely enrich a very potent system.

It would be more like giving them a historiography of techniques than a dictionary.
In my opinion the dictionary and grammar as you say is already provided for.

I was not thinking about, let’s say, seitei iaido when considering the possibility of a koryu kata for jujutsu but more along the line of the aikido of Tomiki Sensei. Besides a modern approach to aikido they have koryu kata to preserve and practice the classical techniques.

Robert,

Thanks for your input.

Hope you don’t mind I put points 1 and 3 together.

True, there are many koryu and they differ a lot. For instance I would not think Yagyu Shingan Ryu would be very suited for the purpose we are talking about because this style differs too much from westernized jujutsu. Historically speaking, the fundamentals of most jujutsu in Europe come from Tenjin Shinyo Ryu; Yoshin Ryu and Ryoi Shinto Ryu.
These styles would be very suitable.
Another option could be koryu which already have spread outside of Japan to a certain degree. The best would be if several koryu would be involved.

Point 2

Why should they? Simply, because we ask.
We would not be asking for something very difficult, or ask them to sell out on their family arts.
We would be asking for advice, for guidance if you will, but mind you we would be asking on an equal basis.

Speaking about myself now, which also brings me to your point 4, I have been practicing the art since 1974 and in my country I am a licensed teacher of jujutsu (translated in Japanese this makes me sensei, nothing more nothing less).
In this capacity I would be asking for advice.

Please don’t get me wrong, a koryu kata as mentioned is not intended to learn koryu jujutsu. It is as you say: “If you want to learn Koryu Jiu Jitsu then join a ryu!” That’s the only way to do it.
This kata could be used to learn more about the underlying principles of the art of jujutsu and to train in some specific tactics and techniques.
Besides that, and maybe even more important, it would mean a link with the past and as such it would be an important contribution to the identity of westernized jujutsu.

It would not undermine or diminish the art, it would enrich it.

This post is too long already, but your comments are highly appreciated.

Regards,

Johan

Sheridan
1st April 2001, 03:29
Respectfully, you might be jumping the gun Mr. Smits. Koryu jujutsu were just contemporay fighting arts at one point in time. For whatever reason, they managed to survive for some cases five hundred or more years. Many people spent lives enriching their arts, good and hard working people that also can be found in western jujutsu nowadays. It sounds what you're trying to do is help the art you love grow, but attaching yourself to a koryu just smacks of insecurity. If your system is effective, your teachers decent human beings and stick to the purpose behind the system, it will flourish.

Respectfully; Mike

johan smits
1st April 2001, 20:20
Hi Mike,

Thank you very much for your reaction. I guess I give the impression that I think westernized jujutsu is in a terrible state practised by a sorry bunch.
That is not what I mean at all. Westernized jujutsu, and I have stated so in earlier posts, is according to me a very effective system. It had to be. It has been tried and tested in two world wars, by several parties. It is practised widely all over Europe and the United States.
It has a history of almost a century, during this time it has changed. For example: techniques which were not very effective, but were a trademark of jujutsu in the early 1900's are today only to be found in old books.
I think the art will continue to change and that is a natural thing and that is good.
What I am concerned with is that the next influence (in my opinion koryu jujutsu) will be brought by people who will damage the reputation of the art and its practitioners.
Koryu jujutsu practitioners keep to themselves, serious practitioners of westernized jujutsu don't seem interested. This only leaves us with the bad guys.
A koryu kata seems a logical solution. A lot of systems practise kime no kata and goshin jutsu no kata from Kodokan Judo. I don't see the difference.
The idea about a koryu kata is not born out of insecurity, it is born out of a strong belief in westernized jujutsu and the willingness to guide it through changes.

Best Regards,

Johan

Davemdh
10th April 2001, 04:21
A lot of people labour under the illusion that if the sensei is not a feeble old Japanese master with grey hair, who speaks only in broken english, that they are not being shown the true way. They watch too much T.V. and now there brain has forgotten how to think. Why would it be any different? If the system has not been changed then its the real deal, baby. If you want to know if a system has been bastardised just ask the Dojo Cho in a polite way. In this Mtv generation, most of the schools that have remained loyal to their roots are proud of this fact and will probably have it in their advertisment somwhaere. Thats why the Japanese have a "way" for doing everything from hip throwing an attacker to examing a sword or drinking tea. Its so that when the things are always practised in the same way they become a ritual. When something becomes a ritual then every succesive teacher copies and teaches the same as he or she copied and learnt. That way, when I learn a new technique, I am learning the excact thing my Sensei, and his and his before him learnt and when I teach this technique it will be passed on in the same way, so that any student will learn the excact same thing as the first student did. Thats why our arts have survived.
About fifteen or sixteen years ago, a senior instructor came to our dojo with a video. This was nothing new, he often did this to demonstrate particularly dangerous moves and the like. This year he had a video of a dojo in Japan who did the same style of JuJutsu as us. It was the first non Japanese in the dojo for many years. They were doing the same techniques that we were. And even though no one in the Dojo spoke Japanese everyone knew what the Sensei was saying.
There are schools who have changed, edited added or deleted, bits and pieces to the syllabi over the years but I would not be too quick to call these Jujutsu systems, although it was their parent. That may be one of the reasons contributiong to the Spelling difference. Even though this was originally due to the romanization of the Japanese language, it has been kept despite the knowledge aquired in relatively recent years of the correct spelling. (there are still those who do not know that there is a difference.) Bruce Lee studied a system (Wing Chun) and saw ways he could change it to make it more practical for his purposes etc. He changed it sufficiently however that he could no longer call it Wing Chun hence Jeet Kune Do. I propose something similar has happened with some JuJutsu systems too.
(Deep breath)

Rant over. Hope this helps.

Dave

johan smits
12th April 2001, 08:23
Hi Dave,

Not a lot of feeble old people here. It's mostly beef with shaven heads and tattoo's and they seem to get younger each time I step on the mat.
About rituals, can't do without them but there is a reason for rituals.
Rituals for the practice of rituals do not interest me a lot, but why they're used all the more.

Recently a very senior jujutsu teacher from my country passed away. He was the last one of the generation that was teaching well before WW II.
What is a shame is that he took a lot of knowledge with him. This teacher kept very much to himself and his students are really at a loss because they feel there are a lot of things they don't know and they can't go anywhere else for the answers.
I really think that is sad because if people would cooperate more with each each other these things would not happen.

Could we call the systems in the West jujutsu, or better should we? That is a difficult question with an obvious link to the identity and koryu kata theme of these posts.
Is there a point at which we should stop using the name jujutsu? And where should we put this point?
Why should we not use the name under which we learned the art? Because some people say it is not jujutsu proper? But then what is jujutsu proper?
And who is to judge?

Questions, questions.

Hoping for answers.

Johan Smits

johan smits
26th April 2001, 11:20
Everybody who has contributed to this post and by doing so were kind enough to share some of their wisdom thank you very much.
I don't think the last word on westernized jujutsu has been said but I do think we had an interesting discussion.
Thanks again.

Best Regards,

Johan Smits