Experiences with the case of emergency

Tom, ask yourself where on earth authentic judo is taught, the way you learned it from your sensei?
I hope you find a couple of judoka here who understand what you want to discuss.
Don't feel sorry for coming here, feel maybe sorry about the current state of judo.

Rensa wrote:Tom, ask yourself where on earth authentic judo is taught, the way you learned it from your sensei?
I hope you find a couple of judoka here who understand what you want to discuss.
Don't feel sorry for coming here, feel maybe sorry about the current state of judo.

Hi Rensa,
You are right ...

I found a couple of judoka in Germany, willingly to practise the old ways.
But in nearly every judo forum I found the same things ...
Judo as a sport only and the statement judo would have been designed as a sport and an educational system only.

There are a lot of texts Kano wrote. You can find he said the opposite.
I could cite lots and lots of it.
Seems that even the words of the founder are no longer from interest in this case ...
What a pity.

Ok, so far.

I think it is enough said from my side.

If there anybody is interested in judo as a martial art in the old ways, everybody is free to contact me.

By the way ...

Tokio Hirano was what concerns scraps, anything but a blank sheet.
Had a bad reputation as a brawler.
And he fought not only when he was a young man.
My teacher Frank Thiele was his student for more than 30 years (up to Hirano's death in 1993), and reports about many "physical discussions" Hirano, for example, in Germany had and with those my teacher was present.

Kyuzo Mifune also was anything but a peaceful person ...
Was a brawler too.
This reports Moshe Feldenkrais which appeals, besides, to a conversation with Kano.

But this, only besides.

As said, somebody should have interest in the old training methods, everybody is free to contact me.

tom herold wrote:

I think I see what you mean... correct me if I'm wrong, but your concern
lies less with the physical capabilities or techniques a person may use
in a fight, but rather the development of the kind of attitude required
to do so without hesitation?

This was one of my points, yes.
Thanks for understanding.


Techniques are important, but more important is the mind-set.
Techniques are only the impreesion of this mind-set.
And, I want hasten to add, I do not mean the sport like techniques of judo.
I do mean the old school ones.

Self defense is- or, has become- a rather complicated and convoluted
subject particularly when related to martial arts, and this often makes
it difficult to have a straightforward discussion about.

Seems so, yes.
But in my pount of view there is no such thing as "self defense".
There is only fight.
In various ways - it can be done as a sport (in my opinion this has few to do with "fight") or in the way it is designed for.
I am sad about the fact that nearly all judoka has forgotten what judo was for, beside the later applications of sport and education.

Depending on ones individual personality and general outlook, hurting
another human being without experiencing fear, guilt, disgust, general
unwillingness or any other negative emotional reaction is generally not
only very difficult, but outside of extreme situations something that I
personally wouldn't want to train into someone even if I could.

I hesitate to contradict you, but ...
This is exactely what I call the problem.
If the situation is going worse and you never before did train what to do now, you are unable to do so.
You want to be able to leave the place upright at least?
Then train exactely that. Learn what you need for that and learn where in judo you will find it.
Nothing else will help you.
Nothing.

I do respect everybody who says: I do not want to train such barbarian things!
Ok.
But then you are a victim if things go worse.
Confronted with real violence, you will be a victim then.
I do know that most sport judoka don't want to believe that.
But my experiences over decades showed me exactely that.

Maybe most of sport judoka never will be seriously attacked in real life.
Maybe.
But is there a guarantee?
Call me a freak, but I can you tell that violence will be find in places you never would expect.

That's the attitude not of a Judoka but of a trained killer, and also
the sort of attitude I'd expect of the person for whom 'extreme violence
is as normal as breathing'; it would be ironic indeed if this
hypothetical training produced people no different from the very threat
against which they initially sought to defend themselves...

I am bit sad to read this.
Especially because you can find phrases written by Kano hinself who told that the first level of judo is "defense against attack", and he did not mean sport.
And Kano - as i wrote in one of my postings here - said that judoka should learn from boxers.
If wished I can bring this words of Kano (and lot more) again,

And by the way - how you will handle the attack of a person who is extremely violent?
How will you leave upright at least if you are unable to attack the aggressor effetive because you never trained to do so?

I never wrote: Kill him!
I say: Do what is necessary!
And if it is necessary to kill him ... if that is the way you can survive his attacks ...
Then do it.

I know there are many judoka interested in get the abilities of "fighting in earnest" (like Kano wrote).
Again and again it is told them: "Not here in this judo club! We do civilized judo, we do not harm anybody! Try it elsewhere! Judo is not for what you want!"

And that, I am so sorry, is crap.
I do not want to be unpolite. Really not.

But what about the guys who want to do judo as an effective martial art?
Judo was as ancestor of koryu designed for that.
The sport idea came much later.

Allright, I thought I could find here judoka interested in other aspects of judo than sport or education.
Sorry, my failure.

I am a bit disappointed now, but it's ok.
I thaught I would find guys here interested in discussing training methods for the reality. I thaught I could find guys experienced in training of atemi-waza like Sakujiro Yokoyama and Nakabayashi recommanded.
I hoped to find other guys experienced in worst case too.

Please do not think I want to be unpolite.
But what for do you have that "Self Defense"-Subforum if nobody wants to talk about really violence and nobody wants to know what to do against this violence?
I am confused about that because all I could read is: "No, man, go ahed, nobody is interested in knowledge about really worse situations of violence. We want to do judo as a sport only. And judo is not made to be used in such situations, so what the crap you talking about?"
Sorry, that is what I read in your postings.
Nobody did ask: "Hey, tell me more about your training methods. Where are they from? What japanese teacher showed you such things? Why do you train such way and what exactely you do during your training sessions? What kind of experiences with worst cases of violence do you have?"

No problem.


Then I am here probably in the wrong forum.
I am sorry if I should have interfered.
I wish you furthermore a lot of fun in the training.
Yours sincerely

Tom Herold

Firstly, I think I should make the clarification that 'Judo' has become a rather vague term... so when I use it, I am using it to refer to Judo as the vast majority practice it - in a dojo with mats, rules designed to limit the frequency and severity of injuries and at least one person ensuring that they are upheld, and partners who are not actually trying to hurt each other (and also, insofar as I am aware full force randori does not usually involve atemi waza. I understand you mentioned earlier that atemi is practiced in full force randori at your club as a matter of routine... I'm not sure how you'd do this without a huge spike in injury rates but hey, it's possible); but all that is immaterial anyway since we're not talking technique but attitude here.

Also, please don't hesitate to contradict me, I'm often wrong and don't pretend otherwise. So, my point was not regarding the physical effectiveness of Judo in a combat situation (it is by its nature physical and combative, which speaks for itself, and it also has limitations as any fighting system does, the extent of which varies depending on how it's practiced, and though it's an interesting area beyond this here and now, for a range of reasons, I'm not touching that facet of this topic with a ten foot pole) nor the founder's intentions in that regard, but rather the issue you raised of the mental and emotional reaction to a fight and the conditioning that Judo may provide in this area. I think you may be misinterpreting my post? The point I intended to make was that fighting despite moral reluctance to do so is one thing, fighting in the absence of moral reluctance is quite another and if you literally meant what you said (and due to the nature of this medium of communication in the absence of other clarification taking what you say literally is the best I can do) you were talking about the latter... and my point was quite simply that insofar as I am aware from everything I've ever experienced, been told, been taught, read, etc. teaching people to be able to switch their compassion and empathy off at will is not something Judo was designed for nor nessecarily even something particularly desirable. That's all I'm trying to say.

And, regarding what I'd do if attacked. Depends hugely on the specifics of the situation. How many attackers? Where? What is their intention? What is their physical condition? Roughly speaking, what is the dynamic of their group (if applicable)? Are they armed and if so with what? Am I? What other materials are at hand? Any one of those variables and more could make a huge difference in my response. In a nutshell, however, I would do whatever I had to to escape & protect myself/allow others to do so if they're also in danger. If I had to hurt someone to do this then I would do so without hesitation- and later, I would almost certainly feel sorrow about this; because the rational recognition that I did what I had to exists along side the fact that I quite simply don't like hurting people, no matter who or what they may be.

Regards,


-Q

@Quicksilver:

Allright, I think that I did now understand your intention much better.
Please remember, English is not my language ...



Maybe I should try to explain again what I mean.
We have so called "normal" judo training too.
More or less ...
For children, youngsters, adults ... whatever.

Less rules, but "normal" training.
Form age of 16 are toeholds and kneelocks allowed. Every grip is allowed, in randori we have no separation between standup fighting and groundwork (or very seldom separated).
From age of 16 are atemi-waza normal in randori.

Allright, there are few guys here who don't want to do atemi in randori, even in my groups.
That's ok.
But most of the guys want to do.

I think it is no problem to prepare the guys to learn and to use such things.
No, we do not use gloves. We only use teeth protectors and protectors for the "deeper" parts of the body.
And I think that my blackbelts and me teach with great responsibility what is to do in randori when atemi are included.

Yes, we have injuries as I told before.
There are blue-hit eyes, burst lips, pains by heavy body hits.
There are knockouts by chin hit et cetera.

But I have seen such injuries and worse in "normal" judo groups where atemi waza not used in randori.
Who trains with me, exactly this kind of the training has looked and knows for which he needs this.

Our randori sees how to me was often said, the Daido Juku quite alike.

Lot of my students take part with big success in grappling matches, in submission wrestling matches and so on.
Less rules than in sport judo.

Yes, we do have a different attitude than in sport judo groups is found.
For me and my students judo is not a sport; for me and my students judo is not end in itself.
We are not interested in "wellness-judo", not interested in sport judo.
We practise a martial art, founded by Kano Jigoro by extracting good koryu stuff.
Is this "not the attitude of a judoka"?
In matter of a sport judoka this maybe so.


But we are different from sport judo, and it seems we think in different ways.
No, there is nobody intentional trying to hurt his partner in our groups.
But if that happens, if anybody is hurt, so what? No problem, there is a friendly ask of forgiveness and we stay friends.

Yes, we try to knockout each other in randori. Same like boxers or Kyokushinkai karateka do.
Yes, we try to choke out each other, we try to jointlock each other and we try to throw in a way that it makes difficult to came up after a really Ippon.
Yes, we do randori "2 vs. 1" with nearly no restrain.
Yes, we try to kick our butts to k.o.
Yes, we use sticks, because Kano Shihan founded the "Kodokan Bojutsu as a new branch of judo" (he wrote 1935 a long article about this).
We fight with sticks like the "Dog Brothers" do.

Are we enthusiastically with violence?
Are we cracked freaks, do we love pain?
No.

But lot of us made very very early in their lives bad bad experiences with violence in a variety of forms.
Most of them who train in my groups do know what violence is before they join our training.
And believe me - like me they do know what violence really is!
And a lot of very young guys (14 up) come to us by exactly that reason.


Shall I offer them "normal" sport judo?
Never.
They know what they want and they get what they want.

And the discipline in our groups is even much better than in the most sport judo groups I ever have seen.
In our groups the "oldies" really watch over the youngsters. And not only on the mat!
We have the "sempai/kohai" relationship at its best I dare to claim.

And then, after learning and knowing what violence is ...
After knowing what really violence is and how to handle it, how to use it, how to deflect it, how to understand it, how to go through it ...
Then begins the moment of self-image, the moment of get on themthelves.
And then ... then it is possible to reach that youngsters.
Then it is possible to speak about "judo as an educational system".
And then all the guys try to handle very responsible what they have learnt on the mat or in our outdoor training.
And this is completely different from sport judo.
But is is judo. Very good judo.
In a very old school manner.

That is my point of view.
Others will have a different sight.

an interesting training method.

frankly what I like about judo is that people aren't trying to punch me. I had many opportunities to get into other arts, or even train in MMA, but I don't because I hate striking. I did plenty of it as a youngster fighting quite often, and I no longer have any interest in punching another man in the face (or in the body for that matter)

does that mean you're a better fighter than me? yeah, almost certainly. but that doesn't mean there's a deficiency in my training, I just train with different goals in mind. and training to fight is not one of those goals. I do judo because I don't want to fight.

@Genetic Judoka:

an interesting training method.

A lot of people said so, especially after they took part in our training.

frankly what I like about judo is that people aren't trying to punch me.

Allright.
If you do not use atemi waza then nobody will punch you during a randori session.
If that works for you then everything is ok.

I had many opportunities to get into other arts, or even train in MMA, but I don't because I hate striking.

As I said my students often take part in grappling, submission wrestling or freefight events in full contact.
We know a lot of groups there.
But we do have all the things an concepts they have, and we do have it better in old school judo.
Some guys from other arts told me that the great draughts which they use come originally from the judo. I could verify that.
So for us it is not necessary to pick up another martial art to become "complete".

Do the judo have punches and kicks?
Yes and very good ones.
Do the judo have the using of weapon?
Yes, definitely.

I would wish that judoka would be PROUDLY on it.

Instead, many sports judoka hasten to explain over and over again what supposedly everything does not belong to it to the judo.
Frankly, that I can't understand.
If that works for sport judoka, then everything is ok.
Nevertheless, I cannot see that sports judoka may define what is a judo and what not.
Especially because there are lot of writings from the founder himself ...

I did plenty of it as a youngster fighting quite often, and I no longer
have any interest in punching another man in the face (or in the body
for that matter)

Allright, this I do understand.
You decided so and that's ok.
But please remember, that judo is more than done in sport judo.
Not necessary to to judo in my way, but necessary to say clear: judo is more than sport judo.
Much more.
Judo has punches, kicks, weapons, and that are not the signs of a "modern sport" built for the Olympics, ok?

does that mean you're a better fighter than me? yeah, almost certainly.

If we talk about real fighting abilities I do think so.

but that doesn't mean there's a deficiency in my training,

As I said: you are going a different way.
My way is good for me, your way is good for you.

I just train with different goals in mind. and training to fight is not one of those goals. I do judo because I don't want to fight.

Different goals, as you said.

Please remember that I said sport judo is not my interest.
I told clear from beginning what I wish to discuss.
So I think that I now did understand your goals and intentions better.
I don't know if you understood my intentions and goals ...
Anyway.

I hope that now the discussion about "judo is only sport and was made up for this only" can have an end ...

I thought I could find here some guys are interested in the old ways and methods, practising for fighting in earnest.
I would like to share experiences with such guys.
I am not interested in explaining what does belong to the judo of the founder and what does not.
I am not interested in to discuss the devolution of judo from 1882 until today. This is done over years and years and I am tired of that.

Again:
If there anybody is interested in judo as a effective martial art, so I am willingly to share my experiences and I am willingly to learn.

Anybody out there ...?

I agree with all your points but must clarify that constables have
different objectives to soldiers. I am long retired from the force but
would expect that certain basics remain the same and that the constable
endeavours to restrain and control an aggressor and where required
present them in reasonable condition (for the circumstances) before a
court. BTW: I would not want to be in their shoes these days with the
legal situation as you quite rightly describe it.

Health workers
can also be subjected to acts of aggression (often unexpected) from
disturbed persons but a response that inflicts excessive harm is not
acceptable. So quick reflexes, getting out of the way or beating a
retreat may be the only option.

Todays judo is a sport just like cycling etc. Go back some 50 years and that was not the case, not at all. How true, you have brilliantly summed up the current state of Judo.

Congratulations Judo dad, as a former LEO myself i know exactly what you mean. I could'nt write a better post than yours. I went through critical situations myself and my judo (not ju jutsu) proved to be the best asset i had to do my job properly.

My point is not to discuss the evidence of judo for police officers or soldiers.
Police officers wear guns.
Legal.
They can request for strengthening so much they want.
Strengthening with guns.
So police officers only need a bit restraining techniques and not a martial art.

Soldiers wear guns too.
Soldiers seldom use bare hands to fight.
I was in the National Peoples Army of the former GDR, and I know what soldiers have to do.
Close-quarter combat without guns is very seldom.
So soldiers today also don't need a martial art.

Judo as martial art is needful for civilians.
But to be needful it has to practised correctly in all aspects and not as a sport.

So I do ask again: Anybody out there want to discuss judo as (old school) martial art for fighting in earnest? Training methods, goals, experiences ...?

tom herold wrote:So I do ask again: Anybody out there want to discuss judo as (old school) martial art for fighting in earnest? Training methods, goals, experiences ...?

Tom, the sort of martial art you are talking about comes from a time when the line between Kano jiu jitsu and Kano judo was quite blurred. Many of the old school members of Dai Nippon Butoku Kai and Kodokan trained in both.

My background is Kawaishi jiu jitsu. Kawaishi trained in schools under the DNBK banner and also received grades from Kodokan (4th, before he left for USA and Europe; and 7th post-war). Although he also had training in Yanagi Ryu and probably Daito Ryu, his judo and jiu jitsu was likely mostly Kodokan. Kawaishi taught a system of judo and also Nihon Goshin Jutsu (self defence). This is what I studied.

When I talk about the old judo / jiu jitsu line being blurred, I think it is less so in the minds of modern people. Judo tends to be sport and jiu jitsu tends to be self defence, so I understand the lack of interest in self defence by those doing modern judo. I think most people today would classify what you do as Kano jiu jitsu though I understand that you are technically correct in calling it judo.

That said, my dojo trains at fighting in a manner similar to yours, by the sounds of it. However, whilst there is a fair amount of hurt associated with training, we do not set out to damage each other. I think we still manage to improve at fighting without training at 100% intensity. Certainly, the guards, prison officers and police within the club report that training is suitable for their needs. I acknowledge that we could do more psychological preparation for self defence / fighting but then most people prefer the physicality of our jiu jitsu training and prefer not to live in a paranoid state of readiness all of their lives.

I am happy to swap notes on training methods. We train in a unique form of jiu jitsu quite unlike Kawaishi or Kano jiu jitsu.

Hi DougNZ,
nice to read what you wrote.


Thank you.

G'day Tom,

I do agree that too much focus on competitions can detract from the many other equally important aspects of Judo.

BTW: Just a point to clarify, in my country (Australia) the police are public servants and are not part of the military. Firearms are only used by police in extreme circumstances and as a last resort.

Hallo JudoDad,
nice to read from you.

I do agree that too much focus on competitions can detract from the many other equally important aspects of Judo.

That's true.

Let's have a look at the kata for instance ...
Which benefit can one derive from the Kata if one fades out that they were not just created, so that the practicing achieves better results in the sporty competition?
Let's have a look at Kime-no-Kata: there are principles teached you need to know in "life-and-death-situations".
That was what Kano himself said about this kata.

Let's have a look at Koshiki-no-Kata.
Yes, nobody knows today exactely what for this exercise was.
But it is more or less a sequence in energy-working.
(No, that is nothing "esoteric").

Let's have a look at Katame-no-Kata.
You do not learn there how to get in jointlocks or strangleholds.
You learn what to do if you reached your opponent and what will happen if he resist with all he has.
What's this ...? What's this if you learn to handle the resistance of somebody you choke? You learn to KILL him even he try to resist with all he can do.
In my point of view that is not sport.
(The "sporty attitude" is to let hm go if he taps).
And indeed ... created around 1883 (and later improved) the Katame-no-Kata had nothing to do with sport.

I do not want to discuss Kata here, because there is another place to do this.
And I do not want to discuss Kata here because here are teachers like CK who know much more about kata than I do know.

All I want to do is to stimulate only to the reflexion.

Gentlemen ...
It's me again.

I do have any questions ...
Allright, I've heard now something about judo as a sport only, I've heard something about that judo is for the most judoka no longer a martial art.
Seems to be never for a lot of sport judoka, isn't it?

Ok, if judo is seen as a sport only I do have no problem with this opinion.
As long as this point of view is not told me as a dogma.
Judo is great for education of children.
Judo is great as sport, great for civilized competitions under strictly rules.
Judo is great for health.
All is true.
I know that, I do accept that.

But what about all the judoka are interested in judo as a martial art?
Interested in the old ways?
Are such judoka here?

Would be nice to meet such guys.
This are the guys I want to talk with.
About Judo.
As martial art.
Call me a freak, call me a barbarian, but I find a little tiresome to have to listen always that one has no interest in judo as a martial art and wants to go in only thus for a little sports, for health, for education and so on.

Are there then here really no judokas which the incompatibility of the "sports thought" with (for instance) Kime-no-Kata has struck?
What about the "Kodokan Bo Jutsu", founded by Kano himself "as a new branch of judo" ...?
What about Kanos words when he said that judoka must learn from boxers?
(You can read this in F. Shishidas writings).
What is with all guaranteed reports on Saigo and Mifune and Hirano and Kimura which have also often fought in brawls as highly calibrated dan holders?

Is the education anchored to the defencelessness already thus in the heads that most judoka even do not want to talk yet about violence and judo as means against violence?

Is it true that most judoka are not interested in the roots of judo?
Not interested in the words of the founder?
Only interested today in doing some sports?

If this is so, for what one should practice then even longer Kata?
Which concrete benefit can a sports judoka from Kime-no-Kata derive then?
Or from Seiryoku Zen'yo Kokumin Tai Iku no Kata?
Or from Koshiki-no-Kata?
None.

This kata never were built for sports.
And by the way ... Nage-no-kata and Katame.no-kate also never were ...

Again - are there any judoka interested in judo as a martial art?

Dear Doug,

Tom, the sort of martial art you are talking about comes from a time
when the line between Kano jiu jitsu and Kano judo was quite blurred.
Many of the old school members of Dai Nippon Butoku Kai and Kodokan
trained in both.

Sorry.
There never was a thing like "Kano jiu jitsu".
From begin in 1882 there only was Kodokan Judo.

Thanks for your answers, JudoDad.

There are Judoka that are
interested in judo as a martial art and there are still clubs that train
in this aspect of Judo. From your post I gather that your club still
trains in the martial art aspect.

Yes, we do so.
As I wrote it is not the one and only aspect we see judo, but it's the main aspect.

I think most judoka are
interested in the roots of judo and are willing to learn if when
encouraged (this is only my view from where I am and could be completely
wrong where you are).

That would be great, but my experiences are different.
In the eyes of most sport judoka my students and me are freaks and barbarians.

Allright, so I hope that all the judoka interested in judo as a martial art try to contact me now ...

Competition is a good
thing; however some judoka may spend put so much effort into this one
aspect of judo that they inadvertently neglect the wider aspects of
judo.

I find it very pity that the restrictive
rules of sport judo competitons brought my students and me to take part
in submission wrestling, freefighting and so on.
Competition is a good thing indeed.

However, it would also be wrong to focus purely on self-defense.

Agree.
But
maybee you will agree that Kano himself called the first level of judo
("lower level") as "defence against attack", and he did not mean sport
competitons.
"Defence against attack" is the basic of the "middle level": "cultivating of body and mind".
No "middle level" without the first "lower level".
Seems to be forgotten ...

The Principles and Aims of Kodokan Judo are described in Chapter 2 of the Illustrated Kodokan Judo (1995) and Chapter 2 of the Kodokan Judo (1986) both published by Kodanshu. There are sections on: Judo as Physical Education, the Two Methods of Training (Randori & Kata), Training the Mind, Ethical Training, Aesthetics and Judo outside the dojo. I have read The Principles and Aims of Kodokan Judo many times and each time has been rewarding.

Nice book.
Useful.
I have got a print from 1956 ...

But please remember that this book is not written by Kano Shihan himself.
It is first edited in 1953.


So I do have more questions ...
Are any judoka here using weapons in training?
Jo for instance ...?
Hanbo, Tanbo?
Are judoka here using sticks in randori like the "Dog Brothers" do?
We do so.

tom herold wrote:Dear Doug,

Tom, the sort of martial art you are talking about comes from a time
when the line between Kano jiu jitsu and Kano judo was quite blurred.
Many of the old school members of Dai Nippon Butoku Kai and Kodokan
trained in both.

Sorry.
There never was a thing like "Kano jiu jitsu".
From begin in 1882 there only was Kodokan Judo.

You are quite correct, Tom; in 1882 Kano began his first dojo at Eishoji Temple, which he called Kodokan Judo.

But of course, all the man knew in 1882 was jiu jitsu and related kobudo. It wan't until almost two decades after its founding that Kodokan judo was 'rounded out' to include a scientific system of groundfighting to complement its strong standing techniques. The Abbot of Eishoji was famously quoted as saying, "The only fault I find in [Mr Kano] is his liking for jujutsu" (Smith, 1958). Kano may have been calling his martial art 'judo' (as were some in Kito Ryu and Tenjin Shinyo Ryu well before him) but it was, to all intents and purposes, jiu jitsu ... and this is what I meant by the line between judo and jiu jitsu being blurred in the early days.

And just to wind the traditionalists up: Hancock, H. I., & Higashi, K. (1905). The complete Kano jiu jitsu. New York, N.Y.: Putnams.

tom herold wrote:
So I do have more questions ...
Are any judoka here using weapons in training?
Jo for instance ...?
Hanbo, Tanbo?
Are judoka here using sticks in randori like the "Dog Brothers" do?
We do so.

I'm interested, Tom; is the self defence and weapons training you do inherited training? In other words, do you teach these aspects of judo the way your sensei did or have you introduced the weapons arts and training methods yourself? If the latter, where did you get your training methods from?

Hi Doug,

I think there are some things to explain ...

in 1882 Kano began his first dojo at Eishoji Temple, which he called Kodokan Judo.

But
of course, all the man knew in 1882 was jiu jitsu and related kobudo.
It wan't until almost two decades after its founding that Kodokan judo
was 'rounded out' to include a scientific system of groundfighting to
complement its strong standing techniques. The Abbot of Eishoji was
famously quoted as saying, "The only fault I find in [Mr Kano] is his
liking for jujutsu" (Smith, 1958). Kano may have been calling his
martial art 'judo' (as were some in Kito Ryu and Tenjin Shinyo Ryu well
before him) but it was, to all intents and purposes, jiu jitsu ... and
this is what I meant by the line between judo and jiu jitsu being
blurred in the early days.

Allright, so far I will follow you.
That's well known.

But please, do not bring this book as a reference:

And just to wind the traditionalists up: Hancock, H. I., & Higashi, K. (1905). The complete Kano jiu jitsu. New York, N.Y.: Putnams.

As far as I know (and I tried to find out something about this over the last 20 years) Katsukuma Higashi never was a judoka.
Every dan rank holder is known in the Kodokan from beginning.
Also in the Dai Nippon Butokukai.
You will not find a "Katsukuma Higashi" there.
As far as I knwo (CK, please help!) there were never a judoka named Katsukuma Higashi.

Yes, a man with this name went with a circus and made "show wrestling".
He seemed to have experiences in "ju jutsu".
Sometimes it is claimed that Katsukuma Higashi (and nobody knows if this was his real name!) a member of the "Tsutsumi Hoza Ryu".
But there is no evidence for that!

Even today living teachers of the Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu have explained on written inquiry that there has never been a person with the name Katsukuma Higashi in this Ryu.
For instance Jan de Jong ... he is one of the teachers of the Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu and he was trained under the Saito brothers.
Jan de Jong told clear that there never was a "Katsukuma Higashi" in the Tsutsumi Hozan Ryu.
And the following is reported and is true:
On the 28th of September, 1929 Werner Glasenapp Jigoro Kano handed a copy provided with personal dedication of the German translation of "The complete Kano to jiujitsu" from Irving Hancock. Today this copy belongs to the continuance of the Kodokan library.
But Kano explained politely, this book contains no judo.
As a result the present Germans (Glasenapp, Alfred Rhode and other) enter, however, one has trained up to now after exactly this book.
Kano repeated his statement that this book contains no judo.

Alfred Rhode ("the father of the judo in Germany") reported this anecdote later very often.
My teacher Frank Thiele often heard this told by Alfred Rhode.

I do know that this is claimed in the internet:

Tsutsumi Masao, the last Tsutsumi Grandmaster, died in 1898. Among his students were Higashi. K, Saito. K (7th Dan) and Saito. S (8th Dan).
Tsutsumi and Higashi were involved in the development of Kano Ju-Jitsu, the precursor to Judo.
Professor
Kanos original intention being to bring together into one system the
best of the Ju-Jitsu schools, Tsutsumi contributed greatly to the
expansion of the Kano Ju-Jitsu system. Higashi coauthored a book with Irving Hancock entitled "The Complete Kano Ju-Jitsu".

http://www.lespereira.com/Documents/Tsutsumi%20Ryu%20Ju%20Jitsu.pdf

Sorry, but this is nonsens.
If Tsutsumi and Higashi would be involved in the development of "Kano jiu jitsu", I am sure Kano would have mentioned these both names in his recordings.
At least, Kano mentions as for the rest the names all their with which he dealt immediately or indirectly.

So it seems very clear: there never was a connection between Katsukuma Higashi (who may always have been this) and Kano and his Kodokan Judo.

So it does not help the traditionalists to have the book of Higashi and Hancock ...
Unfortunately all the things Higashi wrote there are crap.
Sorry.

Hi Doug, next one ...

m
interested, Tom; is the self defence and weapons training you do
inherited training? In other words, do you teach these aspects of judo
the way your sensei did or have you introduced the weapons arts and
training methods yourself? If the latter, where did you get your
training methods from?

Yes, we train with a strong focus on using the principles of judo (and so the techniques) in real violent situations.
But this from age of 16, not for younger children.

Yes, I teach the way my sensei did and his sensei Tokio Hirano before.
Hirano for instance could handle the sword and the stick very good.
And he gave a good sword to my teacher as a gift ...
Few know that Hirano could punch and kick very good and few know that he could handle the sword.
There are tons of photographs and films my teacher has, showing Hirano for nearly 30 years in Germany and the Netherlands.
Very rare films.
Some show Hirano handling a stick (I would say it is a hanbo).
Hirano demonstrated with the stick some principles to attack multiple attackers.
Very interesting.

I did find similar things in the concepts of the "Dog Brothers".

Have you ever written a post knowing one should not?

Mmmmmm. This has been a very interesting thread. No doubt about it an awful lot of information has been posted. Not sure if my intervention will be welcome, let me know I will delete this post if it causes a problem. Its going to be a long post so get comfortable.

There is only one kodokan judo that being the form of judo founded by Kano Jigoro Shihan. The name is kodokan judo. There is no kano ju jutsu.

Why isn't there a Kano jujutsu? The answer to this is so basic and simple we often overlook it. Ju jutsu was being taught and practiced but falling into decline as Japan decided to have a social revolution, Japan began to reject many of its past cultures and ways and many saw the West as the way forward in terms of organisation, education and social behaviour blah blah blah.

Kano Shihan learned at least two ju jutsu and two of them he became a master. So this begs the question why didn't he simply name his new system kano ju jutsu or kano ryu? Japan was turning away from its past identifying such things as Ju jutsu as barbaric and in no way suitable for a new cultured educated Japanese society. Ju jutsu schools closed by the dozens and there masters became involved in other form of earning a living.

Kano shihan was one smart cookie. kano Shihan was an intellectual and embraced this new change in societies behaviour. Judo was to be an education of the mind and body and in no way even related to a martial art. The absolute core of kodokan judo became a budo, a martial way.

What's the difference in a martial art and a martial way? 95% of the world calls judo a martial art, even those who practice it?

One word to me resolves this issue that word being INTENT. In a ju jutsu ryu it was the objective to learn how to kill an enemy. No thought of safety it was kill or be killed and many students did die and many others where maimed for life. The mind set of a true original ju jutsu was and still should be to destroy ones opponent .

How does this Judo of Kano differ then? Several basic and highly significant ways. The intent of the judoka is to preserve at all cost the welfare of his partner. The way we educate the character in judo is through its physical practice now if we harm our partner we cannot practice, no practice no personal development. INTENT.

Now the water start to get muddy. kano had to sell his judo to the public at a time when all who wore dogi where becoming seen as at least anti social or at worst down right villains of the peace. To fellow ju jutsuka I have no doubt whatsoever kano sold judo as another form of a martial art. if he lectured a group of female knitters he would have sold judo to them as a way of developing strong and nimble fingers, to an educationalist as a system of building character through physical training and mental growth.

How does judo develop a respectful character. The THEORY is we each when we fight, fight like a tiger, fight to win but fight within a code of conduct and that conduct is centered around the welfare of our partner. More than this after some time of practice the winning part of practice is soon identified as winning against the self, our real opponent in judo (not that we have one) is the self. To control another person may just need strength but to mast the inner self takes a life time if ever and in general this inner character training is NOT about reaching an end but how we travel that course. The education of judo is not an end but a continued life long work that we are not supposed to master.

Mastery of the gokyo etc is a needed part. With a physical mastery we can better fight a partner this better learn self control self discipline, honour, self respect, respect for others. These are the goals of kodokan judo. I hate to write this but....Kano was quoted as saying the real aim of kodokan judo was world peace.

So. In terms of self defence judo or any other budo would not be number one on my list. In self defence we cannot have a benevolent felling toward our opponent or we would soon become the victim.

let me make tis crystal clear from word go. One cannot teach self defence to children or women or most men. light the blue touch paper. Self defence is a nasty form of activity as one is learning how to harm an attacker. Cant do that with a mind set of be kind lets talk it over...I need to add the best forum of SD is never to place ones self in a position where one may need it. Self defence DOES involve a minor healthy form of almost paranoia, its not, of course, paranoia but it is self awareness and awareness of ones surroundings and circumstances.

Judo has NEVER been a method of self defence. I know, I know, many books say judo the art of self defence. Cant be. Sure if we spend a life time working 7 days a week on a tatami refining waza and refining our character we MSY be better equipped to avoid the use of SD or in the worst scenario be able to actually use judo as an SD.

NEVER has atemi waza being mixed with general randori in kodokan judo. It would result in death or severe injury. It would be totally against the mind set to knowingly harm another judoka.

Atemi in kata. I so often hear the only way to practice atemi is in the form of kata. This is also incorrect. The waza of atemi need to be learned in parallel with the kata. There was atemi randori and it was called something different and I cannot for the life of me remember the name, I keep getting butsukari come into my head and that would not be correct as such as a form of randori. Light sparring would be the terminology.

Why learn atemi if judo is not about SD? Open another thread and I will debate this.

Kodokan judo is the judo developed by Kano Jigoro.

The judo taught and practiced at the pre WW11 DNBK was ALSO kodokan judo taught by Kodokan ju dan like Isogai Hajime et al who taught my sensei.

There is no such animal as Kawaishi judo. Kawaishi ju jutsu. Kawaishi was advanced in kodokan judo through his studies at the DNBK. When he came to Europe he was among only a handful of judoka who knew judo to any level. To this end most things he did and taught where, of course, different, they where not his though they where stock kodokan judo waza. What Kawaishi did was to remove much of the Japanese language and replace it with a set of numbers. Why. Well Kawaishi is said to have found it easier to teach this way. The ogoshi of kawaishi is the ogoshi of every other kodokan and DNBK sensei of that era.

I am now going to muddy the waters. Seeing as I have mentioned ogoshi I need to add non of my sensei taught ogoshi holding around the back they held around the neck or at the top of the collar at the spine of uke. I must also add that an awful lot of kodokan sensei did this also. I digress.

With this information to suggest that kodokan judo is a form of self defence is rather a non starter. I taught SD and judo in the army and the two subjects where not even close. The mind set is different and the techniques much more effective and simple at killing a person. SD is not suitable for teaching the public for numerous reasons.

Kodokan judo WAS developed to cater for the human body in terms of health, physical fitness and character development. There is a clip her of a very nice sensei teaching a group of top judo athletes and nearly all of these athletes has either toes or fingers bandaged including the sensei. Clear sign we are missing the point of judo and concentrating on the wrong aspect that being winning a medal when judo is so much more or was so much more.

Any practice in judo that is aimed at hurting or harming our partner is no longer called kodokan judo. INTENT. Accidents have do and will happen but the key word is accident. There is zero space for the intent of judo to be aimed toward the harming of another human being. I guess with luck some tricks from judo can be used to defend against an attacker and that's fine. Point is there are far more efficient ways of teaching SD than through judo. That is why kano shihan developed judo in the first place to remove the notion that all form of physical fighting are immoral and wrong. Kodokan judo develops a healthy mind and body if we are getting hurt we are doing something physically wrong or worse practicing with the wrong intent.

I fear this is a garbled post as the whole post itself is so complicated and has taken so many different routes hence my over complicated waffle as a reply.

Must go,

Very best wishes,

Mike

Thank you, Hanon Sensei.


Yes, there is a difference between the "old jujutsu schools" (koryu, and I hasten to add that these koryu not only included "ju jutsu").
But what I did learn from my teacher is different from what you wrote a bit.

All the things of education, mutual welfare and so on are later applications of judo.
The basic was and is no different from what in koryu is practised.
Only the training methods differ.
This is, by the way, the same what Hirano Sensei to my teacher said.

Kano developed safer training methods by embettering the old ways.
But this had firs of all nothing to do with "to become a better human being".
It had to do with take away the lot of injuries in training.
This is what I have learned.
Maybe I am wrong.

Kano himself wrote about judo Judo as means to educate the Japanese people to be well-fortified.
Also this is meant if one speaks of judo as a "pedagogic system".
I think we should not forget this.


I think there is big problem in understanding judo today ...

We should make clear ourselves that judo was invented, so to speak, three times.
First was there Kano Jigoro which understood his judo as an heir of two Koryu. And Kano changed this and that and tried to develop his judo (but not in the sense today is misunderstood!).
Later judo was taken in by the Dai Nippon quay Butoku and was adapted the doctrine of "Yamato Damashii".
And after the end of the II world war judo was invented to third sometimes - as a harmless sport.
If one considers this, something becomes clear, I think.

I do not try to make my idea of judo to a dogma, ok?
I do only try to preserve what I could learn from my teacher.
As I could see this way of understanding judo is very different from the mainstream today ...

Anyway, i have no choice.

Dear Hanon Sensei, you wrote a lot of very good points.
I will now have a lot to think about.

We all have to learn such a lot in judo.
Me too.
I never claimed it would be not so ...

But please do not abandon simply what I have to say.
That's all I want.

Yes, what we do is definetely not the mainstream sport judo of today.
We go a very old fashioned way.
But it is the way my teacher way was shown by his teacher.
It is the way my teacher showed me.
It is a martial arts judo.
And I have to go this way, even the whole world would say it would be wrong.

A hobby is the occupation of ones time.

A ju jutsu is the perfection of ones technique. There is no consideration given to human life.

A budo is the perfection of the self, The road we follow to a non achievable point.

If judo was a martial art kano would simply have called his sytem kano ryu. He didn't he founded a completely new system. One founded around the notion of non violence.

This is hard to swallow for those who never practice judo. We throw, we arm lock, we strangle and he hold until a partner submits. How can these be the acts of a benevolent system aimed at building character and leading to world peace. it all sounds on the surface, ABSURD.

Again I repeat the main fifference is intent. A martial art is an art of war. Mars the planet of war. Martial the acts of war. And yes judo has an appearance to the uninitiated to be of the same branch.

Ju jutsu is a bugei or act of perfecting ones physical technique to a point of great efficiency. No consideration is given whatsoever toward the person trains with, he is the eney and is to be treated as such. No mercy requested and non offered. This is about survival and THE best attitude for a self defence.

A budo is centered around acts of pseudo killing or maiming! I need to extrapolate. What is the significance of an ippon? An ippon in terms of judo or other budo is a pseudo killing point. If that technique was performed on a non judoka in the street with the INTENT to harm, ones adversary would be dead or totally unable to continue to fight. An Ippon throw is a devastating physical action. Uke learns to fall so is kept safe if tori performs a safely executed throw and with the correct INTENT e.g tori would stop his attack when nearing the edge of the tatami and stop before breaking the arm of an uke in the application of an ude kansetsu waza.

The ultimate act of taking a life is sacrificed for the self development of the inner being. Thus in judo children aged 5 to 95 can practice some form of judo, now that would be an absolute impossibility in a martial art as only the strong can preval as the weakest are.... well.... killed of. This IS the nature of martial arts, bugei.

Judo is a budo, a system of education, safe education, the whole point of practicing judo is to develop a strong healthy body also mind and if or when we get hurt this is the result of an accident ad not the intent as in true martial arts such as MMA. In a budo we can have 100 ippon fights and still walk of the tatami. In a martial art such as MMA you can see after one bout one of the fighters can no longer continue, and no MMA'er can go on for 100 ippons in one day? That is not the intent of the MMA. Different mind set different physical and psychological aspects.

If judo is to be identified as a martial art ukemi would not be taught and all the other pedagogy that embodies kodokan judo could be placed away. Hang on that's what ju jutsu is and what judo developed away from.

This may seem semantics but it is the very core of what we are all about. Every time you refer to kodokan judo as a martial art you are reducing it to a fighting system. I know you know its an awful lot more than that, its a martial way, that way is the journey we take when we start to learn judo. Its a non ending journey and perfection is not even in sight. Human beings are flawed the point of judo is to offer a vehicle for safe growth and development of a healthy body and mind and thus each of us, in some small way, make a positive difference to another's life. Some times we will affect others in a negative manner that is to be expected and clearly understood. We have a right to be fallible, non of us will perfect the self its not even the point. The point is self awareness and to understand we are not perfect and make as much change to our character as times and circumstances allow. Ju-Do. not ju Jutsu.

Thanks for taking the time to read the waffle its as difficult to write as it is to read. lol

Regards,

Mike

I have issue with much of the romance about the birth of judo (or aikido or whatever...). I'm not sure on what day Kano opened the doors of the Kodokan for the first time; let's say it was 1 June, 1882. I struggle with the assertion that on 31 May 1882 Kano closed a box that contained ju-jutsu and on 1 June 1882 he opened another and out popped judo. Many of his early students were ju-jutsuka and Kano's ideas continued to develop over the next five decades. Sure, he had some different ideas and training methods on 1 June 1882 but to the observer, what he did that day would have looked like ju-jutsu and, indeed, his landlord made that very observation that it was.

I also struggle with the idea that Kano 'invented' do. The term judo was in use well before 1882. The concept of martial study as a vehicle for self improvement was around well before 1882. It was, and is, possible to use the study and practice of ju-jutsu as a vehicle for self improvement.

When Hanon says that in ju-jutsu there is no consideration given to human life, he couldn't be more wrong. Ju-jutsu techniques have always been taught in stages, with more dangerous techniques taught to the longer serving and most trusted students. Why? Because most techniques are potentially lethal and sensei understand their ethical and moral responsibility to keep themselves, their students, their students' families and the general public safe from irresponsible people using potentially lethal techniques. That is the first consideration for human life.

The second consideration for human life is etiquette and discipline. When the sensei says "Stop!", the class stops. When a student steps out of line the senpai scolds him. The reason? Discipline is the difference between an all out brawl and a ju-jutsu class. It is plainly rediculous to think that students would experience damage and death on a daily basis. Strikes were controlled, submissions were acknowledged and ukemi was taught so that uke could get to their feet for the next throw. But while they did not experience damage and death on a daily basis, they did face it, and that is where the 'do' came in in ju-jutsu. It was only by understanding that each engagement with uke could be one's last - that each attack could mean death - that the student learnt to embrace life and value it.

The samurai studied bujutsu and followed budo. Bushido was essential to maintain discipline and to strengthen trust between superiors, subordinates and fellows. Life was valued and it was understood that a) taking a life to save a life or just cause was necessary; and b) giving one's life to save a life or just cause may be necessary. Developing that sort of deep understanding and exemplifying the code required of a person who deals in death came from the study of budo. Ju-jutsu was just one form of bujutsu but was an essential component of budo.

It was when ju-jutsu was spread by people who were not sensei and were not bound by the ethics of their line of sensei that it became known as a dirty art. Kano's reaction to the lack of morals and discipline of 'street ju-jitsu' was to more carefully codify respect for one's fellow human beings and to reinstill the concepts of budo for a modern age. The difference between what he did and the old koryu did, was that he moved with the times and made his concepts accesible all classes of citizens, not just descendants of the warrior caste.

Hmmm ...
Allright, some of your points are valid.
But there is more.
I dislike (sorry) the idea that Kano came and built up a "moral system".
We should not mix up our "moral ideas" of today with what Kano understood when he wrote about "moral", ok?

And we should not forget that the term "judo" is used before Kano.
It is used not only in Jikishin Ryu or in Kito Ryu.

But in Jikishin Ryu the term "judo" is used to describe "the most effecivtve way to use the priniciples of fighting".
There are some old writings about Jikishin Ryu where you can find this ...

So Kano "borrowed" this term because he said that would be the best to describe his own fighting system.

And we should not forget another point ...
"Kodokan" was the name of a military school.
And Kano "borrowed" this name too ...

I am in contact with some guys are involved in practising Tenshin Shinyo Ryu an other koryu.
There is no idea of "bushido", because in feudal Japan there never was a "codex" for all "samurai" they had to follow.
I think everybody should know this, at least after reading Karl Friday et al.

There were some governmental laws in Edo period, but ... one no was called "bushido" and none of it was obliging for all samurai.
There were local "codicee", but not "bushido.
There were governmental law, but no "bushido".
The term "bushido" is a rare one, seldom used in writings in Edo period and hardly to find in the Sengoku Jidai or in the Azuchi-Momoyama.

There were only few writers using such terms.
"Samuraido" and "bushido" are used by Tsunetomo Yamamoto in "hagakure", but that was not the "codex of bushido".
And Daidoji Yuzan and others never wrote a "codex" called "bushido".
And even the " Buke sho Hatto" is not the same like "bushido".
Sorry, there never was a "bushido" before Inazo Nitobe in 1899 invented this "codex".

It is impossible to appeal to the Bushido because this did not exist.

Again: there were governmental laws, there were local (for every "han") laws and even this or that "codex", but there was never an obliging "bushido".

Allright then ...

The samurai studied bujutsu and followed budo

Sorry, but ... no.
Both terms are used in feudal Japan very similar.
We can find this well explained and proved well in the books of Ellis Amdur, M.Skoss and D. Skoss, Hall, Friday, Dave Lowry and lot of others.

And there is on thing nobody wants to hear:
"Bujutsu is killing people!"

Maybe after Meji begun the "do" is emphasized more and more.
Maybe in few schools this is done in the late Edo.
But there were never "do" to make Bujutsu "harmless" or "peaceful" before.
This was not the meaning of "do"!
The meaning of "do" (seen as "method") was not to bring peace in a martial art or any philosophical refections.
This was the interpretation of "do" in the Meiji and later.


Allright, we can't ask Kano shihan what his true intention was when he founded his judo.
Simply we do not know that.
There are writings he showed that he wanted to have a martial art.
There are writings he showed that he wanted to develop more then this.
What shall we do now?

This is my point of view:
Kano wrote that the "fundamental" of judo is the ability of "defence against attack".
All other things will come later.
I like judo as an educational system, but it is misunderstood I think.
I accept judo as sport but it is not my way.

Judo is a martial art.
Weapons included.
And studied in the old ways it is the very best fighting system I have ever seen.
No Sambo, no Krav Maga, no "modern hybrid system" ...

I can't understand why such a lot of sport judoka won't accept this.
Should we not be PROUD of what Kano founded?
Should we not be PROUD that judo is one of the best and most effective fighting system ever founded?

Shouldn't we stop better trivialising our own fight system?
Should we not stop looking at judo only as a harmless sport or as an education system?

I think it is time to come back to understand that judo is a true martial art.

And by the way ...
Nothing is more embarrassing, as if highly calibrated Dan is beaten up by an aggressive beater and remains, besides, absolutely have no chance.
For it there is in my opinion no excuse.

What for all this high ranks if any aggressive idiot is able to beat this hig ranked judoka without any problems?
I have often seen that!
Guys with 4th Dan, 5th Dan ... very good sportsmen, and they had no chance against an at best third-rate, but experienced violent criminal.
This is embarassing!

And this is one of my points, beside all the history stuff.