daio ryu aiki jujutsu? Hapkido and its completely different branches

[Silver Dragons]

After doing lots of research into the history of Hapkido only one thing is clear.....the founder of the name is either Ji han Jae or Yon Sul Choi. However, according to Choi himself he only taught what Tokaku Sakeda taught him which was Daito Ryu. He then went to Korea and called it Hapkido (according to him).
This information of course does not fall in line with how we see Hapkido today. Modern Hapkido is characterized by many kicks not just throws. So basically that would make Ji Han Jae the true founder of modern Hapkido since Yon Sul Choi only taught Daito Ryu.
I also read an interview with Master Jong Bae Rim that confirms this. He teaches Rims' Hapkido, however his system does not have any kicks at all, which I found fascinating upon discovery. He essentially teaches exactly what he learned from Choi which is supposedly Daito Ryu in its "complete form". Tokaku Sakeda apparently told Choi that he was the only student that he taught all his techniques to.

So I have come to the conclusion that Traditional Hapkido is just Daito Ryu Aiki Jujutsu while Modern Hapkido (Ji Han Jae's) is the one we mostly visualize when we think of Hapkido.

Any comments, opinions or new information would be greatly appreciated.

[Virtuous]

His name is Sokaku Takeda the 32 patriarch of Daito Ryu Aiki Jujutsu. Choi was a servant of Takeda, from my understandung he never was formaly trained in Daito Ryu but was ever present in the dojo. After Takeda died Choi returned to Korea and taught Hapkido. I have worked with alot of people who study Hapkido and we have compared techniques. My conclusion is Hapkido is nothing like Daito Ryu Aiki-jujutsu, some of the same principals may be applied but they are not the same.
Now I dont hold rank in Daito Ryu but the Ryu I study is pretty close and I have trained at a few of Kondo's clinics. I would be very interested in seeing Kondo's reaction if some one told him classic Hapkido is Daito Ryu.

They may share the same roots but they sure as hell arent the same tree.

Could you site your sources?

[Virtuous]

This is just my personal prefrence and feel free to disagree but I dont like Hapkido one bit (modern or classical) but Daito Ryu fascinates me and I train in it every opportunity I get. So how can they be the same?

[Thomas]

Here's a good article on the history of Hapkido...http://www.martialartsplanet.com/magazine/articles/hapkido1.htm

The history of Hapkido tends to come in many forms and discussions sometimes do get pretty heated. If you have any specific questions about Hapkido in practice, there are lots of people here who can give pretty good advice.

Virtuous: I am sorry that you say "I dont like Hapkido one bit (modern or classical) " Maybe by hanging out in the Hapkido forum and taking part in the discussions, you may find out that it can be a good style after all.

[shadow warrior]

Virtuous:

Just how many second generation Korean Hapkido Masters have you trained directly with? In order to make statements as you have made. it should be at least two! One from EACH of the two source lines.

Whether you think so or not Master Choi's Hapkido is almost IDENTICAL to Daito Ryu. Master Allen who is located in Florida is an example of a third generation through this line.

You have admitted that you do NOT hold any rank whatsoever in either style, so on what extensive training experience are you basing your opinion??

Comparing watered down versions of techniques shown to you by freinds (who are students of unknown Hapkido lineages) to what is recocognized as the source of MANY ROOT Hapkido techniques (Daito Ryu) and concluding they are nothing alike betrays your lack of in depth knowledge.

Your personal opinion flies in the fact of FACT!

It is true that many Hapkido lines are almost nothing like Daito Ryu however, a couple of lines are virtually identical!

Almost ALL of the projections, misdirections, kick, punch and knife defences are unchanged from their source. Although many things have been added to Hapkido, dynamic twisting is dynamic twisting period. Whatever your friends are showing you, it is NOT classical Hapkido.

To experience this you must train directly with second generation Korean Masters of Choi himself.

Next you will be saying that Aikido has nothing to do with Daito Ryu and their techniques are but marginally related!

[Silver Dragons]

Virtuous:

You can read the Choi interview on the net at www.hapkido-info.net or look up The Hapkido book by Marc Tedeschi. You might also find websites of dojos whose master's are second or third generation straight lineage from Choi and you might find that what I am saying is true.

It might not be identical with some things added in but what Choi taught was Daito Ryu basically.

[mountainsage]

This is the second forum that I've read that stated there is no kicks in traditional HKD. As a TKDer that really interests me and answers a question I was going to ask. What are some sources of practical info. on traditional KHD. I am a student of the history of Korean MA because I like bursting the bubble of revisionists historians. A question probably more for a TKD forum than HKD is what has been removed from traditional TKD and credited to HKD and visa versa?

Mountainsage

[Virtuous]

He essentially teaches exactly what he learned from Choi which is supposedly Daito Ryu in its "complete form". Tokaku Sakeda apparently told Choi that he was the only student that he taught all his techniques to. SilveDragon
This was the statement I found hard to swallow. Espescially when it is very debatable that Choi was ever formally taught.

As for what formal training I have had. I study and hold rank in Dai Yoshin Ryu which is an offshoot of Daito Ryu and I have trained at a few of Kondo's seminars, so I have a good understanding of what Daito Ryu is.

Shadow warrior:
I simply said I did not like hapkido, I did not said it sucks or its the worst martial art ever or something just as stupid. As as matter of prefrence I dont like it, there is nothing wrong with the art it just does not suite me.

This dynamic body twisting is what my friends were showing me and when I showed them traditional Daito Ryu Techniques they were just scratching their heads. So it is very likely they are told they are being taught classical but are learning something entirely different. Then you're right my opinion is skewed.

[SoKKlab]

Funnily,
If this thread was on somewhere like E-Budo, it would be the 'Hapkido is from Daito-Ryu' guys that would be getting their ears burnt with vitriol from people who say that 'Hapkido is not from Daito-Ryu' and contains no 'Aiki'.

Personally I don't know what to believe (or whether it is such a big issue), other than Choi founded it, probably from stuff that he learnt in Japan.

But then if you see Traditional Korean Tae-gyun (Tae-kyon. No, it's not just a Kicking art it has grappling, locks and pins as well) and Han Pul, they look alot like basic Hapkido and very Chinese!

So who's to know for sure? There might be something to it (From Daito-Ryu), there might not. Interesting though.

[Silver Dragons]

Virtuous:

I did not say that Choi's claims were fact, they might be outright lies who knows? He "claimed" to have been a student of Sokaku Takeda, which might not be true. What is true is that he was a master in Daito Ryu when he left Japan for Korea, he somehow learned it either by watching or being a direct student of Takeda. Many second generation masters who are direct students of Choi teach Hapkido in a way that looks extremely similar to Daito Ryu with modifications nonetheless.
I personally study from Ji Han Jae's lineage and can tell you with absolute certainty that the large majority of joint locks, throws and the such are from Daito Ryu or have their roots in it. This is a fact.

[KiWarrior]

HKD is daito ryu + whatever was going on in Korea at the time, hence its identity as an eclectic art. Also to keep facts straight Tae-kyon is not very related to TKD, except that both are frequently practiced by Koreans.

The fact that there remain schools teaching "traditional" hkd makes me quite sad. Anytime an art becomes stagnant it begins to lose efficacy. At this point a HKD school I would want to rejoin would incorporate basic kicks, punches (j/y)udo throws and the yudo version of newaza. Certainly no poomse, heck that wasn't even in Choi's hkd.

[Silver Dragons]

I partially agree with you KiWarrior. I feel Hapkido should allow itself to evolve and incorporate things that are useful e.g.(kicks) which is something that traditional hapkido doesnt have. However, traditional Hapkido does have a place in martial arts but it by no means should call itself the one and only TRUE hapkido. There are many branches and styles and whichever suits the individual best is the one that person should choose.

I personally feel Grandmaster Ji's Hapkido is the more complete art and therefore I feel like a more complete martial artist. I can kick, throw, grab, grapple, punch and perform joint locks. Nonetheless, I must assume this is only a personal taste. If you dont like kicking then try another style.

[mike-IHF]

reply,

This is an interesting conversation, I along with oter members on budoseek were just having this same discussion. Being a practitioner of Hapkiyusul, and a student of master Allen, I can assure you that the original art taught by GM Choi is infact Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu. As to why some of his students decided to change there ways it's an ongoing mystery. Choi first called his art yawara, then Hapkiyukwonsul, then Hapkiyusul, and later it was named Hapkido. So why do you think he would call his art, which is the exact translation of Aikijujutsu unless thats what he was teaching. ppl, that don't believe that Hapkido is from Daito Ryu, most of the time have only studied americanized, or from students of GM Ji's style. They have had no experience with Hapkiyusul. The main reason why is because only very few of Choi's students continued to learn and teach Hapkiyusul, and not branch off into there own art. To silver dragons: I am glad to hear that you are happy with your style, but not all the time does kicking make an art more complete. When talking about arts like Aikijujutsu, Hapkiyusul, Aikido. Kicking would almost in some ways make the art incomplete. These arts are based on full circle wholeness, or sphereicity. In order to keep the function of centeralisation, and spinning you must remain balanced. So by kicking in these arts would infact make the function of these aspects impossible. "namaste"

[KiWarrior]

I completely and wholly disagree to the point of invective comments which would get me banned.

If you're not learning to properly punch and kick and incorporate them into what you do you also will not know how to effectively counter those techniques. And if you aren't incorporating one of these other "ranges" you are absolutely incomplete. Kicking isn't solely high kicks, balance doesn't need to be an issue.

Aikido is a great example of that, you're right. They lose the striking (often) for idealogical reasons and they lose efficacy.

All great martial artists of yore were mixed martial artists.

[mike-IHF]

reply,

Kiwarrior, I don't know why you sound that mad with my last post. All I was saying was in reference to silver dragons post, because he was making it sound like kicking by itself is automatically going to make an art more complete. I was writing to disagree that kicking does not always make an art complete. I was talking in reference to using kicks offensivly. Yes I do agree that learning how to kick for defensive purposes, as in kick defense I do agree with. We have very few kicks in our style, but we do learn them to know how to defend against them. BUT we never kick within a technique. Meaning if we are doing a hand technique on the uke, we never add a kick in with that hand technique. There is no need. This is what GM Choi taught. A kick does not necessarily have to be high in order for you to be off balance. Acording to some of Choi's students, Choi used to say "your feet are ment to stay on the ground". In the Aiki, or Hapki arts even if your foot is 3 inches off the ground you can be taken off balance by the other person. As to your post stating that ALL the great martial artist were mixed martial artist. That is complete BS. Choi himself is not considered a mixed martial artist, so do you consider him not to be great? There are plenty of ppl that dedicate their whole life on one art, and there is nothing wrong with that. If they are learning a complete system then there is no need to study other arts. "namaste"

[KiWarrior]

No I would not consider him to be great in the sense of being an innovator, not at all. By all accounts (regardless of how he learned, servant adopted son, whatever) he simply regurgitated what he had learned from Takeda Sokata (sp). That means in the sense I was using it he certainly wasn't.

How can any system be complete if it doesn't incorporate striking and grappling (standing and ground)? It can't. The more proficient you become in different types of attacks, the more complete you become.

Also if you don't actively train kicking you cannot develop effective defenses, because your ukes are not going to be kicking the way an effective and fight tested individual would. This is the same reason why "anti-grappling" is a joke. They are testing their shot defenses on people who don't know how to shoot.

[Silver Dragons]

Mike:

I never said that just by incorporating kicks would this make you a more complete martial artist, it is only one aspect of martial arts that should be learned though. I think its absurd to think that kicking is innefective. Furthermore, this theory of no kicking because it takes you off balance sounds more like a passed on tradition of closedmindedness. Saying that would dismerit many effective striking arts such as karate, tkd, kung fu. etc.

Choi was a great martial artist, no doubt about that however it was Ji Han Jae who was the innovator. Tradition is good but ALL arts must continue to evolve to remain effective in their respective day and age. As Kiwarrior and many enlightened great martial artists have said, if you truly want to become a complete martial artists YOU MUST KNOW ALL THE RANGES OF COMBAT E.G. (PUNCHING, KICKING, KNEES, ELBOWS, JOINT LOCKS, HOLDS, THROWS, GRAPPLING AND DISARMING). To not do this would be a disservice to yourself as a martial artist.

[KiWarrior]

Enough of what I've read by Ji Han Jae makes me think he is a bit disengenous about his role in the innovation and development though. Not to mention he is a bit of a kook who tries to justify his beliefs about ki with a horrible understanding of physiology and science.

[shadow warrior]

The evolution of Hapkido began as soon as Master Choi started teaching students with knowledge of other martial arts. Many talented individuals were attracted to his set of techniques, but not all of them restricted their skill sets to include ONLY those he taught.

This thread was started to discuss the relationship between Hapkido in its modern beginning and Datio ryu as seen in Japan. There is no doubt there is a close relationship between them. The techniques of Master Choi were from what other source??

Most of the second generation Hapkido Masters I know describe Hapkido as a "living breathing" martial art. That is an art which does not and should not stand still in its skill sets. This has of course led to the increased diversity within the art of Hapkido.

Yu - Sool was what Master Choi originally called his art. It did not include ANY usefull kicking techniques at all! Other striking techniques were also quite limited!

However, by the mid 1960's MANY Kwans had been granted to Hapkido Masters and schools that were NOT just sets of Yu - Sool techniques. Numerous sets of techniques which came from other arts were included..if they were consistant with the three principles..circle, flow harmony..

Unfortunately, as time passed many people added techniques and whole Kwans which were not an integrated part of the original philosophy..

Those who remain 'traditional' to the original root are preserving much which should be a part of modern Hapkido, but other skills have been included by necessity in an ever changing world.

Hand skills similar to boxing and dynamic kicking were introduced in the mid to late 1950's. These skills were tested for promotion in many Kwans from the early 1960's. The Korean Hapkido Association (forerunner of todays Korean Hapkido Federation) tested for these skills even when Master Choi was Head of the Kido committee!

Although Hapkido has evolved in diversified lineages a few remain Yu - Sool based, some reflect skill sets from the mid 1960's, while many are now just new Tae Kwon Do/Hapkido lines with some joint locks.

[mike-IHF]

reply,

Kiwarrior, your attitude is not very mu-do like on your reply. I at no point in this discussion been rude or inconsiderate of your points of view. First: you said quote" ALL THE GREAT MARTIAL ARTIST WERE MIXED MARTIAL ARTIST" you did not say anything about innovators. SECOND: I already said that it is good to train with kicking for DEFENSIVE purposes. I agreed with you on that, so I don't know why your trying to throw that back in my face. I stated that it is good to learn, and study kicking for defensive purposes i.e KICK DEFENSE. But we never kick within a technique. This is the second, and last time I'm going to repeat my post. If you have a problem with reading I suggest you get glasse, or maybe an EGO check. "namaste"

[KiWarrior]

You = missed point

I said "No I would not consider him to be great in the sense of being an innovator, not at all."

I wasn't talking strictly about fighting ability, I don't consider some random 8th dan a "great" martial artist either. I wouldn't consider someone who didn't somehow innovate or progress thing to at all be "great". That like hero is a term used far too often.

You're also missing the point about kicking. If you don't learn to do it for "real", the defences you have for it are only going to be for poor representations of what a good kick would look like. I totally understand your point, you are missing mine. Bad kicks = bad defenses for them.

You also talk about "complete" systems. How can something be complete if it is lacking kicking for crying out loud?

As for the lack of "budo", whatever, I strongly disagree, you throw insults. Check your ego, I know enough about mine.

[mike-IHF]

reply,

Kiwarrior, this is obviously going nowhere, therefore this will be my last reply concerning this discussion. my post reflect what you said, not what you ment to say. When you say "ALL" great martial artist were mixed martial artist, I take it that you mean "ALL". if thats not what you mean then don't write it. Otherwise ppl will misinterperate what your saying. Finally: there are systems of martial arts that I consider complete, if you do not than that is your opinion. Aikido, Aikijujutsu, Hapkiyusul do not have alot, if any kicking in their ciriculum. If you do not consider these arts complete systems than fine we will leave it at that. I am proud to have the training that I have recieved in the past years, however I am an american, and I am also a federal law enforcement officer. We do not compete in our art, nor in all my years on this continent seen americans on the street attacking someone with a kick. Most martial arts were developed for there surroundings. it was not big in Japan for ppl to kick. thats why the Aiki arts do not have an exstensive ciriculum on kicking. The only reason kicks were incorporated into Hapkido is because of the known fact that Koreans like to use kicks. i.e Taekyon, Taekwondo, etc. So my point is that unless I compete in tournaments, or for some reason get trapped on the continent of asia somehow I do not think it is that important to learn every single kind of kick that exist. So as an american, and living in the U.S it is a known fact that someone here at an atm machine is probably not going to attack you with a kick, hence my point. "namaste"

[KiWarrior]

Well here in america I got kicked in the head, so what is your point? In all your years as a leo you've never seen anyone kicked. Surprising to say the least.

All great martial artists cross trained to some extent. A great martial artist isn't solely a high ranked martial artist. Every president hasn't been a "great" president have they?

Again how can an art that leaves out punching, kicking, grappling or weapon work be "complete"?

What is your definition of "complete"? It certainly isn't the dictionary definition.

[mike-IHF]

reply,

Kiwarrior, I will answer you but this is the last reply I make on this because we are going in circles. If you got kicked in the head in a street fight by an american than I don't know what to say to that. As far as what I consider complete, I don't think anything is really complete as far as a personal growth. But as far as a system of fighting, or rather defensive tactics I believe the arts I mentioned above are complete sysytems of combat. The samurai, or in korean YONGSA used these Aiki arts. Look at how long the samurai ruled Japan, your talking hundreds of years. They did not have to resort to kicking to prove themselves. Maybe your defination of a complete system is different that's fine. As to your question in all my years as an leo have I never seen anyone kicked? I never say never, but does it happen all the time NO. I have only seen a few situations were an attacker tried to kick. But my point is that your everyday american that picks a fight with you at a school, or bar is not likely to attack you with a kick. Americans do not fight like Asians do. I'm not saying it could not happen, but you also have to use commen sense on the street as well. But anyway I have wrote enough for this topic, lets just move on to better things. "namaste"

[Silver Dragons]

guys lighten up eehhh!

Mike, I understand where your'e coming from however I doubt how you can't see the merits of using kicks in your self defense repertoire. Now im not talking about high kicks since I know such kicks used in self defense are only for those who are very proficient at it but a good knee kick or side kick to the midsection are very simple to learn and EXTREMELY effective. Now im only 24 and am not a law enforcement officer like you are so I probably dont have the real world experience you have. I have been in only so many fights in my life...id say less than 5, and yet i have been able to use kicks at least to the midsection to protect myself and can say that they are effective and not too risky(mid to low ones at least). Well anyways this is a moot point.....kicking really isnt for everybody! Some people can barely lift their legs but could most likely wipe the floor with me(some Aiki-jujitsu masters)hehe. It must be that that style fits you perfectly however mine fits me perfectly(know what i mean?) everyone has their own style.

Shadow Warrior:
I saw your website and videos and HAVE to compliment you on your approach to training your students! Thats almost exactly how we train down here in Panama. All Martial Arts schools should teach their students to lose fear of combat and getting hit. Look at those videos people! The students are getting their asses handed to them for their belt test but I can guarantee you without even meeting them that they are much stronger people after having gone through that. Applause for Shadow Warrior!jaja

[KiWarrior]

Originally posted by mike-IHF
and I am also a federal law enforcement officer... nor in all my years on this continent seen americans on the street attacking someone with a kick.

Maybe kicks were incorporated into hkd because they were a missing and that left a hole in the style not because weee... they're fun.


as far as what I consider complete, I don't think anything is really complete as far as a personal growth. But as far as a system of fighting, or rather defensive tactics I believe the arts I mentioned above are complete sysytems of combat. The samurai, or in korean YONGSA used these Aiki arts. Look at how long the samurai ruled Japan, your talking hundreds of years. They did not have to resort to kicking to prove themselves.

Prolonged rule based on economic power and a fuedal system does not translate into a "complete" samurai art in place to hold down the peasants. Seriously, what are you talking about?

Again how can a fighting (offensive and defensive) be at all considered "complete" if it neglects a major component of fighting?

[shadow warrior]

There is something quite noble about trying to preserve a certain martial arts traditional roots. There is a connection to the past and the comfort which comes from knowing that your skill sets were developed and passed on intact for generations.

The only fundemental problem which occurs relates to how the world has changed in the interveening centuries.

INFORMATION IS POWER!

Innovation is a generator of same!

Take flying for example. No fighter pilot would think of challanging an F16 with a WW1 biwing in combat.

They both use the theories of fundemental flght but an incredible amount of innovation has occured since the early part of the last century.

Don't forget that the Japanese OUTLAWED ALL martial arts in Korea (except Judo and Kendo) when they occupied the county for 35 years. They did the same in Machuria!

Despite this draconian tactic MANY traditonal Korean martial arts survived in one form or another.

I think what people should keep in mind is that martial arts are "CULTURAL CAPITAL" in the sociological sense. The MORE skills you have, the MORE "CAPITAL" you posses.

I can not speak personally about the frequency or diversity of kicking techniques in the US as displayed in street or bar fights! What I can say is that here in during my more than 15 years of extensive front line work in TO, kicking attacks occured on a regular basis (mostly attempted inside, outside knee, leg and groin strikes). However, I also witnessed a few dynamic kicks to the head which resulted in serious physical damage..woke up couldn't talk right type!

Given the time most people have to train in modern society today it is unrealistic to expect most students to develop high level skills in ALL aspects of martial arts.

For this reason in some cases it is probably better that certain Masters teach 'complete systems' which do not require proficiency in ALL aspects, but rather an in depth understanding of root concepts which are then applicable in most situations.

This relates to experience, philosophy and time available more than getting into an argument over my system is MORE complete than yours.

Silver Dragon:
Thank you for commenting on the videos, we will be posting many more captured during testing including some kick defense applications and "open field" twisting. If you want to see explosive kicking and nasty twisting watch Master Hwang in Young Master with Jackie Chan. Master Hwang is where our dynamic kicking techniques originate!

[KiWarrior]

Originally posted by shadow warrior
This relates to experience, philosophy and time available more than getting into an argument over my system is MORE complete than yours.



I apologize if this is how it appears I am behaving. I simply cannot understand how someone can classify a style as complete when it is lacking punching, kicking, throws or grappling. That seems to belie the very definition of the word.

[mike-IHF]

reply,

Shadow warrior: Thank yu for your reply, I completely understand what your saying. Kiwarrior: I already explained why kicks were incorporated into Hapkido. Gm Choi originaly took about 12 kicks from Taekyon to incorporate into the Daito Ryu that he brought back from Japan. He incorporated these kicks to build a better defense for the Aikijujutsu, since Aikijujutsu did not have a good defense for attackers that kick. At no point were these kicks intended for OFFENSIVE purposes. He incorporated them to build a better kick defense for the Aikijujutsu. It's just like military intelligence, if you know how your enemy attacks you can build a defense for it. Daito Ryu, or Hapkiyusul is a multible attacker art. being so this is why Choi never taught kicks offensively. If your surrounded by 3 attackers, regardless if you do a high kick or a low kick, by you trying to kick one of them and your foot comes off the ground all the other attackers have to do is tackle you or push you down, then there are going to have the upper hand. This is why I say we never kick Offensively. Martial arts history has shown that kicks were originally designed for horses. Back then if you had a calvary, ofcourse you would have the upper hand on the foot soldiers. So the foot soldiers came up with a way to knock the riders off of their horse during battle. The low kicks were designed to break the horses knee joint, which would make the horse go down and the rider would fall off. The high kicks were designed to break the riders leg, you can imagine trying to put preshure in a sturip with a broken leg. I'm not saying that other studentsof Choi did not incorporate Offensive kicks in their form of Hapkido, that is a known fact from what you study, and what shadow warrior studies. I'm not at all saying it's wrong, what I'm trying to explain is that Hapkido, and Hapkiyusul are two different things, with different purposes. I hope that this has helped so we can move on t a better topic. "namaste"

[KiWarrior]

Wow, you actually bought the "kicks are for knocking people off horses bit"? Wow.

As I said learning just for defensive purposes isn't really that great of a thing as you'll not really know how and when said technique would be executed, the shooting example I think looks at this pretty well.

Anyway, I got your point and you viewpoint on the integration of kicking, my question has been for awhile now "Again how can a fighting (offensive and defensive) be at all considered "complete" if it neglects a major component of fighting?"

[TigerGrishkin]

Kicks for cavalry?! Whoa! They're called pikes, buddy! Use 'em if you ever have to take infantry against cavalry.

Oh...there are no such thing as Korean samurai.

[KiWarrior]

Someone should have told Mel Gibson in filming Braveheart to have all the kilt wearing laddies do jump kicks.

[mike-IHF]

reply,

Kiwarrior, obviously you and Tiger have to crack jokes in order to get your point across. I have given enough reason, and explaination behind why I think certain arts are complete, if you need more explanation, then ask someone else. Oh and TIGER: I never said there were Korean samurai. I said "samurai or in korean Yong sa. I was giving the korean language translation of samurai, I was not saying there were korean samurai. I have wasted my breath with this ridiculous topic. "namaste"

[KiWarrior]

You've not once defined what you consider "complete", beyond listing a few "aiki" arts. In all seriousness for the umpteenth time how is something lacking kicking to be at all considered incomplete?

That is why I am perhaps "harping" on this topic, because you haven't provided an answer.

As for the horse comment, I would encourage you to actually go and look into martial "history", seperate the myth from the reality and apply a little critical thinking to the point.

In other words the horse story is myth.

[hapkiyoosool]

Greetings,
Everyone will be pleased to know that we teach it exactly as Choi Young-Sool taught it. We are one of the few schools in the US that teach it that way (like Rim's). Many people have added many types and styles of kicks and other things after coming to the USA in order to make it more marketable to the American Pallette (so I have been told by Ji Han-Jae and several others) No Kicks in the original techniques. Hapkiyoosool IS Aikijujutsu and we teach it as such. The same Chinese calligraphy, just pronounced differntly by the cultures. I agree that Choi Young-Sool is not the Founder of the art of Hapkiyoosool but, did found the first school in Korea (1946) under that name and it got out of control when the Koreans claimed he was the founder. It did change to Hapkido after they added Kick defense however, then is WAS founded as its own style in 1946 as Hapkido. Choi is the founder of Hapkido if you want to get technical but, let's not. Our federation president (Chang Young-Shil, 9 Dan) began under Choi Young-Sool in 1949 and we still call it Daedong-Ryu-Hapkiyoosool (Daito-Ryu-Aikijujutsu). The Koreans are not to keen with the Japanese as you all probably know but, we are recognized by the Japan Head Soke Council as Aikjujutsu in our federation. If any of you are in the area at anytime you are more than welcome to study with us. You will see NO flying kicks nor fancy jumping. Watch a Daito-Ryu video and then come here. You will see the SAME thing. We just move a little faster. The Japanese seem to be a bit more robotic.

Hope to see you all soon. BTW GM Chang is come to the US for his third US visit in October. It will be in Utah at Hill Air Force Base. contact us if you are interested: hapkiyoosool@msn.com
Cheers!

[American HKD]

Dear Master Allen,

Jung Ki Hapkido and GM Lim make the same claim as you original unchanged system of Choi Yong Sul. What is the differance in your Kwan from Jung Ki?

BTW Gm Lim claims to be the aire to Hapkido from Choi so that would make Jung Ki Kwan closer to the source and your Master his junior correct?

Jung Ki HKD does in fact have 9 basic kicks from what I'm told by Masters of Jung Ki and they teach other kicks too so they can learn to defend them.

Also Ji Han Jae told me directly and I'm his student who received my 1st dan from him in 1983 that Choi did in fact teach a few kicks and Ji Han Jae also teaches original Aiki techniques from Choi Yong Sool.

Also a correction Kicking was added to HKD in the early 1950's in Korean not in the US for Americans as you stated.

My opinion is actually all these people are original sources meaning GM Lim, Doju Ji Han Jae, and your Master Chang Young-Shil! They all learned directly from Choi Yong Sul up to master level.
Just looking for further clarification.

Thanks

Stuart Rosenberg
4th Dan KHF Ulji Kwan
5th Dan Sin Moo HKD

[nj_howard]

stuart,

i dont' believe that master im claims to be "the" heir to choi young sool. he does say that he teaches exactly what he learned from choi, but he does not, to my knowledge, claim to be the only person who does.

just a clarification. regards, howard

[Silver Dragons]

hapkiyoosool,

Im very curious as to how you and your students go about sparring?

[hapkiyoosool]

Dear Stuart,
Your question was: What is the difference in your Kwan from Jung Ki?
Well, not much. We move a little different. If you have ever watched Daito-Ryu then you have seen how we operate. We try not to move so much like Robots as the Japanese do. They do that in class and demonstration so you can see the technique better because the techniques are designed to last only a second and then you deal with the next attacker. The techniques are designed around the fact that the attacker is not going to go quietly and will struggle against them thus breaking their own joints.

You asked:BTW Gm Lim claims to be the aire to Hapkido from Choi so that would make Jung Ki Kwan closer to the source and your Master his junior correct?
Thank you Howard for answering that. Yes, what Howard said is true. Grandmaster Chang Young-Shil started training in 1949. A teachers personality comes out in the techniques so they do teach them a little different but the same techniques if you really look at them. Do you know Micheal D'Aloia? He has visited our school and he is JungkiKwan. Iron Eagle Hapkido (http://www.jungkihapkidoamerica.com) I know that GM Chang also taught military on base with GM Han Bong-Soo in the early 60's before GM Han came to the US. There is another man in Korea who came on national Korean TV to claim was the "heir" and got blasted by negative responses from the real Choi Students. He did train (during the 70~80's) but he is also not the "heir" as he claims. His name is Kim Yun-Sang and here is his link. Go to the Data room and watch his interviews and techniques, I hope you speak Korean. Let me know what you think of this man. ww.hapkiyusul.com (http://www.hapkiyusul.com/eng/introdu.htm) Show this to GM Ji and GM Lim.

Jung Ki HKD does in fact have 9 basic kicks from what I'm told by Masters of Jung Ki and they teach other kicks too so they can learn to defend them. Also Ji Han Jae told me directly and I'm his student who received my 1st dan from him in 1983 that Choi did in fact teach a few kicks and Ji Han Jae also teaches original Aiki (Hapki) techniques from Choi Young-Sool.
Also a correction Kicking was added to HKD in the early 1950's in Korean not in the US for Americans as you stated.

The kicking was taught as far as to learn to defend against kicks in the 50's yes and we teach them as well. There are very limited and very low kicks (more like stepping into the ankles and knee joints to break them), small sweeps to the ankles but, not the flying and flashy kicks and such were added after Hapkido made its way to the US. Please understand when I think of "American" style Hapkido Kicks, I think movie martial arts, not the traditional types of kicks. I agree with you.

[hapkiyoosool]

hapkiyoosool,

Im very curious as to how you and your students go about sparring?

Great question. I get it often. Well, when I think of sparring I think of sports. Martial (military) arts are not sport so I say we do not spar. We do pracice very rigorously though. Military is not the place for friendly competition. Break things and kill people as quicly and effortlessly as possible was the original intent of the techniques. Control is used according to circumstance. We do attack at full speed and power as someone on the street would. Like I said in my previous post. We try not to move so much like Robots as the Japanese do. We do that in class with the new students and demonstrations so you can see the technique better. The techniques are designed to last only a second and then you deal with the next attacker. The techniques are designed around the fact that the attacker is not going to go quietly and will struggle against them thus breaking their own joints. Our black belts do try to get out of the techniques (unsuccesfully when applied correctly) and usual come away with very sore joints and deep tissue bruising. It usually causes them to pass out from the pain and pressure point applications within the techniques just before the joint actually tears apart from inside out.

[nj_howard]

stuart, master allen and others,

the way i understand it (from master im), master im began training under choi in 1964 or 1965. in or around 1976, choi closed his own school and became a kind of professor emeritus at master im's school. he remained there until his death in 1986 or 1987.

if you can read korean (i can't, unfortunately), you should be able to find the complete story on master im's website:

www.jungkikwan.com

master allen, jungki "sparring" is very similar to what you describe, except we don't go to the point of injury. we do not spar in the typical sense of the word, like they do in tkd and some styles of karate. as you say, the techniques do not lend themselves to that, they are too inherently dangerous. by that i don't mean that all jungkikwan people are killing machines or anything similarly silly. i simply mean that the techniques are designed to cause pain and injury, not for competition. typical "sparring" is therefore not part of our training.

master allen, i am one of master d'aloia's students. he enjoyed meeting you and working out with you in florida.

there is a gentleman still teaching in new york named chang chin il. there is some evidence that he is the closest person to a choi "heir" as there might be. apparently choi asked chang chin il to become responsible for uniting hapkido, but it's unclear to me whether this meant only in the US or also in korea (chang chin il was already living in new york when this is said to have occurred, around 1982). chang chin il is said to have a video tape of this conversation with choi. who knows.

stuart, i'm not sure exactly how many kicks we use in jungki hapkido, but there are not many, and they are very basic, and never to the head. heel kicks to the legs, anywhere from the waist down, are used frequently. we use kicks primarily as diversions to create an opening for a joint locking technique, or to finish a technique once the attacker has been controlled.

hope this info helps... regards to all, howard

[American HKD]

Dear Master Allen & Howard,

Thanks for your explanations.

How would explain any differances from your style to Sin Moo in regards to Yu Sool techs if possible?

Hapki

Stuart

[hapkiyoosool]

After doing lots of research into the history of Hapkido only one thing is clear.....the founder of the name is either Ji han Jae or Yon Sul Choi. However, according to Choi himself he only taught what Tokaku Sakeda taught him which was Daito Ryu. He then went to Korea and called it Hapkido (according to him).
This information of course does not fall in line with how we see Hapkido today. Modern Hapkido is characterized by many kicks not just throws. So basically that would make Ji Han Jae the true founder of modern Hapkido since Yon Sul Choi only taught Daito Ryu.
I also read an interview with Master Jong Bae Rim that confirms this. He teaches Rims' Hapkido, however his system does not have any kicks at all, which I found fascinating upon discovery. He essentially teaches exactly what he learned from Choi which is supposedly Daito Ryu in its "complete form". Tokaku Sakeda apparently told Choi that he was the only student that he taught all his techniques to.

So I have come to the conclusion that Traditional Hapkido is just Daito Ryu Aiki Jujutsu while Modern Hapkido (Ji Han Jae's) is the one we mostly visualize when we think of Hapkido.

Any comments, opinions or new information would be greatly appreciated.

You are absolutely right!! We teach the same thing that Rim's does according to one of his students who I sent a video of our techniques too. We are also recognized by the World Head Soke of Japan as Aikijujutsu as well. There are no kicks within the techniques but we do defend against kicks. In Korean it is called Hapkiyoosool and that is what we are. To go even further it is Daedong-Ryu-Hapkiyoosool (Daito-Ryu-Aikijujutsu). We are registered in Korea under this name according to our Grandmaster Chang Young-Shil who beagn training under Choi Young-Sool in 1949 and recieved his certs for 8 Dan in 1978 from Choi. The certs are on the wall of the HQ in Korea and can be confirmed by MANY people. He was promoted to 9 Dan somewhere around 1982 from what I understand but, keeps that certificate in a safe at home. I started training in 1976 and moved to the USA in 2000 with my wife to opened a school and did that in 2001. We have been teaching in the US for about 3 years now. I am finding it a challenge to keep explaining that Hapkiyoosool IS aikijujutsu, my brain hurts.

Any other questions should be able to be answered from our website history page or directly emailing me from the website.

Thank you all for your wonderful insight.

[nj_howard]

Dear Master Allen & Howard,

Thanks for your explanations.

How would explain any differances from your style to Sin Moo in regards to Yu Sool techs if possible?

Hapki

Stuart
stuart, sorry, but i'm not nearly familiar enough with the details of sin moo techniques to answer your question. jungki is the only hapkido style i've ever trained in.

i think we would all agree that sin moo places a lot more emphasis on kicking.

i have seen some video footage of master ji doing a few locking techniques, and from what little i've seen i'd say that sin moo uses larger circular movements than jungki, in which the circles are usually kept quite small.

a couple of our black belts went to a ji han jae seminar a few months back. they were quite impressed with what they saw, even though at this particular seminar master ji himself did very little hands-on teaching. it seems that his senior instructors were first-rate, though.

sorry i can't offer you more... regards, howard

[American HKD]

Dear Howard,

Our system and I'm speaking of the Ji Han Jae Tradition which is the only style of HKD I ever studied, uses both large and small circles.
As you know most techniques can be modified to large or small circles as needed so we're taught to do both at will. Some people may have a preference but I teach both methods.

We do emphasize many kicking skills but let me explain. We use kicking in all ranges of combat and have 25 basics then combos and Jumping, spinning etc.

1. to cover distance ( long range moving in or out )
2. to reach hights ( Jumping high or over obstacles )
3. In close ( low line or self defense situations )
4. Combos ( Multiple attackers )

You can see how kicking can add a great deal of weapons to use in actual combat and yes we stress low line kicks in the street or against skilled opponents who may counter higher kicks but our skills there to use if needed.

Once in close we use striking, locks, and throws, takedowns, off balances as you would etc.

Hapki,

Stuart

[nj_howard]

dear stuart,

thanks for your reply. i hope you didn't think that because we use few kicks in jungki hapkido, that we think they're not good techniques. not at all. it's just that our style doesn't employ much beyond a few very basic kicks. the way you've described sin moo kicking techniques, i agree with you, it adds a great deal of weapons.

good discussion. hope we can continue to generate similar informative threads here.

all the best, howard

[American HKD]

Dear Howard,

I did'nt think that at all!

Stuart

[Colin Linz]

When reading this thread I remembered seeing a site that listed the geneology of Aiki Jutsu, I have cut and pasted the chart for your convenience. If you would like to evaluate the reference the site address is http://www.hwarang.org/Aikigenealogy.html . I’m not sure as to how accurate it is as it lists Shorinji Kempo as a traditional derivative. While I’m sure Kaiso would have incorporated some of his Hakko Ryu experience into Shorinji Kempo; however it should be noted that he only trained with Hakko Ryu for a couple of years. The bulk of his experience was in China.

Aikijutsu and Aikido Genealogy
and
A History of Daito Ryu Aiki Jujutsu
Shinka Saburo Yoshimitsu, 12th Century, Daido-ryu
Saigo Chikamasa, 1829-1905, Oshikiuchi
Takeda Sogaku, 1858-1943, Aikijujutsu
Takeda Koechi (son of Sogaku)
Yong Sul Choi, Hapkido, Derivative Traditional
Shodo Morita, Nihon Goshin Aikido, Derivative Traditional
Matsuda Hosaku
Okuyama Yoshiji, Hakko-ryu, Derivative Traditional
Nakano Michiomi, Shorinji Kempo Derivative Traditional
Yamashita Minoru, Shindo-ryu
Yamada Saburo, 1926-1976, Yamate-ryu Derivative Traditional
Takeda Tokimune, 1925-, Daito-ryu Aikijutsu, Aikibudo, Main-line Traditional
Ueshiba Morihei, 1883-1969, (with Uyeshiba Kisshomaru) Aikido, Derivative Modern
Tanaka Setaro, Shinriaku Heiho
Mochizuki, Yoseikan
Fukui Harunosuke, Yae-ryu
Shioda Gozo, Yoshinkan
Otsuki Yutaka, Otsuki-ryu
Inouye, Shinwa Taido
Hoshi Tetsuomi, Hoshi-ryu Kobujutsu
Hirai Minoru, Korindo
Tomiki Kenji, Tomiki-ryu
Noguchi Senryuken, Shindo Rokugo-ryu
Tomei/Tohei Koichi, Ki no Kenkyukai/Shinshin Toitsu
Ueshiba Kisshomaru (son of Morihei), 1921-, (with Ueshiba Morihei) Aikido, Main-Line Modern

[nj_howard]

colin, great link.

interesting to see choi young sool where he is in the tree. i expect you know that there is a raging debate about whether he ever studied drajj at all.

who really knows. there is no documentation that either confirms or refutes his account. one thing that is absolutely certain, however, is that he was one formidable martial artist when he returned to korea.

[Colin Linz]

Howard,

Sometimes we place too much emphasis on linage. What is important is what is taught. Although if someone makes a false claim, and tries to claim association with, and trade off another’s reputation, then this should be condemned. It should not matter how someone developed a style, what matters are that they are upfront about it from the beginning.

When examining established styles we sometimes try and look too close. Usually they have been around for some time and a lot of baggage accumulates on the way, and facts can be difficult to prove, this can make sorting fact from fiction difficult. In the absence of substantiated facts I think we need to trust the individuals, after all If you don’t have faith in them how can you trust and respect the teachings?

[nj_howard]

colin, excellent thoughts. i certainly share your views.

i train in a very traditional form of hapkido; we recognize choi young sool as the founder of our art, and the head of our kwan trained directly under him for over 20 years. however, i don't get very emotional about the whole daito ryu debate. based on what i've observed on a number of m.a. discussion boards, it seems that some daito ryu people feel very strongly about this whole matter (and discount choi's story of having studied under takeda in japan).

as you say, what's important is what's taught. the art speaks for itself. if you find fulfilment in the art, that's the most important thing.

[ramonnavarro123]

Hi Silver Dragons and all here be blessed.

I am a HapKiDo SabomNim, am a 4th Dan and been teaching Song Moo Kwan HapKiDo for 28 years under KwanjangNim Park, SongIL 9th Dan and founder of Song Moo HapKiDo.

Grand Master (Teacher of Teachers: as we call him since we say that there is no Grand master for in the modern world there are no slaves) Mr. Park, SongIL was one of DojuNim Ji, HanJae 10th Dan and whoom we recognize as Modern HapKiDo Father oldest students and Master Park said that when he started HapKiDo under Mr. Ji, HanJae original Sung Moo Kwan HapKiDo back in 1958 there was no TaeKwonDo only KwonBup, KongSooDo and SooBahk plus DaeDong Yu HapKi Yu Kwan Sul until the rest of the other school flourished with the name of TaeKwonDo in the early 1960.

Mr. Choi, YongSul first student was a JuDo Black Belt and that was were the counter throws in HapKiDo come from. This person is Su Bok Sub (sorry if the name is mis-spelled) and that after he, Mr. Ji was from age 13 studying under Mr. Choi for nearly 6 years since 1949 and left to go to his home town. Mr. Ji wanted to continue learning so he started training with a Taoist Monk known as Taoist Monk Lee in TaeKyun or TaeKiYun and every one knows this is a martial art spetializing in special kicks. This then Mr. Ji used to formulate HapKiDo.

As I heard directly from Mr. Ji; he started his configuration in the mixture of both of this martial arts and thought that he considered Mr. Choi his teacher and what he came up with in a formulated curriculum was no longer TaeKyun that he went to Mr. Choi and asked him to watch what he had done with what he, Mr. Ji had done with DaeDong Yu HapKiYuKwanSul and TaeKyun and that he, Mr. Ji called HapKiDo. About the use of the word Do in HapKiDo was because the word Sul means only technique and Do as a way of life he could take out Yu and Kwon/Kwan and avbreviate it to HapKiDo tought it was also diferent now in the way it is as he showed to Master Choi whom liked it and ever since until his death that he used as the name of his art since and by respect Mr. Ji asked him to have this name for his, Mr. Choi's art since it was shorter for people to remember.

Many other things such as waepons that Mr. Choi did not use were added to the HapKiDo curriculum and is what HapKiDo is known for today.

HAP

Ramon Navarro
HapKiDo SabomNim
Song Moo Kwan HapKiDo
Panama Republic of Panama

[MJR]

By way of introduction, I am a senior student of Master Hwang In-Shik and have been his student since 1986. I also travelled to Korea where I lived and trained for 2 years in 1994 and 1995. I was able to speak with teachers, like my own, who knew and trained with Choi. One was Kim Jeong Yoon, who at one time was one of Choi's highest ranked students.

I also took a few trips to Japan staying for 6 months in 1991 and for 2 years from 2000 to 2002. I trained with Mochizuki Minoru who was direct student of Kano Jigaro and Ueshiba Morihei and who had met and trained with Takeda Sokaku. On both trips I was in contact with Kansai Daito-ryu group, the Takumakai, and trained with students of senior teacher Okayabashi Shogen who was a direct student of Hisa Takuma and Takeda Tokimune.

I offer this information because I think probably there are few people who had this combination of experience and so speak from references of what they have heard from others rather than what they have experienced. It is clear from my personal experience that hapkido has a direct technical connection to Daito-ryu. Senior Daito-ryu practitioners also attest to the identical nature of hapkido techniques I have shown them to advanced Daito-ryu techniques which are not normally shown or taught at lower levels.

This having been said hapkido fights from a fundamentally different stance and 'moves' differently than does the Daito-ryu practitioner. It seems empirically clear that hapkido descends from Daito-ryu specifically and not another form of jujutsu. It also seems clear that at some point hapkido went in a dramatically different direction than the original art, which is supported by accounts of second generation hapkido teachers. To say that 'original' hapkido is pure daito-ryu, if the technique of the founder preserved represents this is, I think, false. Even in the footage that I have seen, what he is doing is still identifiable 'hapkido' and not daito-ryu.

Those that say that Choi Yong Sul did not practise kicking are also incorrect as footage of Choi shows him kicking, conservatively but over his own waist and quite limberly for a man of his age. However it is also false to sat that daito-ryu has no kicking as kicking is of great importance in daito-ryu. It is just that the targets are conservative and some times the aims of such kicks are different than in hapkido. It would be more correct to say that neither Choi Yong Sool nor Daito-ryu employed the dramatic high kicks seen in today's hapkido dojangs. (And which I, incidentally, feel are of great worth.)

While it is true that hapkido is not Daito-ryu the connection between is closer in some respects than is presently found in many aikido dojos, in terms of techniques no longer practised in modern aikido forms and 'against the joint' techniques.

When I was in Japan in 2002 this was a topic still very much alive and yet there seems to me a lack of new infomation. Assertions of Choi being an adopted family member seemed to have been easily dealt with, while people like Mochizuki-sensei have asserted to me personally that he believed that Choi was probably a servant of Sokaku.

During Sokaku's lifetime, (before the popularity of aikido) while he had many important people as short term students, Sokaku himself was not a very well known teacher. It certainly couldn't have been Choi's idea to use Sokaku's name to promote himself in post Japanese occupation Korea. Not only would people have not known or cared who Takeda was, but the climate was one where such connections were more likely to make this an unpopular connection.

I also have suspicions about the widely spread interview of Choi which was circulated so long after his death. How do we know that this interview is actually comprised of his words? The content leaves me sceptical.

These are just my observations but I have personally studied both arts under senior practitioners and I think very few people who speak to this subject have.

[American HKD]

By way of introduction, I am a senior student of Master Hwang In-Shik and have been his student since 1986. I also travelled to Korea where I lived and trained for 2 years in 1994 and 1995. I was able to speak with teachers, like my own, who knew and trained with Choi. One was Kim Jeong Yoon, who at one time was one of Choi's highest ranked students.

I also took a few trips to Japan staying for 6 months in 1991 and for 2 years from 2000 to 2002. I trained with Mochizuki Minoru who was direct student of Kano Jigaro and Ueshiba Morihei and who had met and trained with Takeda Sokaku. On both trips I was in contact with Kansai Daito-ryu group, the Takumakai, and trained with students of senior teacher Okayabashi Shogen who was a direct student of Hisa Takuma and Takeda Tokimune.

I offer this information because I think probably there are few people who had this combination of experience and so speak from references of what they have heard from others rather than what they have experienced. It is clear from my personal experience that hapkido has a direct technical connection to Daito-ryu. Senior Daito-ryu practitioners also attest to the identical nature of hapkido techniques I have shown them to advanced Daito-ryu techniques which are not normally shown or taught at lower levels.

This having been said hapkido fights from a fundamentally different stance and 'moves' differently than does the Daito-ryu practitioner. It seems empirically clear that hapkido descends from Daito-ryu specifically and not another form of jujutsu. It also seems clear that at some point hapkido went in a dramatically different direction than the original art, which is supported by accounts of second generation hapkido teachers. To say that 'original' hapkido is pure daito-ryu, if the technique of the founder preserved represents this is, I think, false. Even in the footage that I have seen, what he is doing is still identifiable 'hapkido' and not daito-ryu.

Those that say that Choi Yong Sul did not practise kicking are also incorrect as footage of Choi shows him kicking, conservatively but over his own waist and quite limberly for a man of his age. However it is also false to sat that daito-ryu has no kicking as kicking is of great importance in daito-ryu. It is just that the targets are conservative and some times the aims of such kicks are different than in hapkido. It would be more correct to say that neither Choi Yong Sool nor Daito-ryu employed the dramatic high kicks seen in today's hapkido dojangs. (And which I, incidentally, feel are of great worth.)

While it is true that hapkido is not Daito-ryu the connection between is closer in some respects than is presently found in many aikido dojos, in terms of techniques no longer practised in modern aikido forms and 'against the joint' techniques.

When I was in Japan in 2002 this was a topic still very much alive and yet there seems to me a lack of new infomation. Assertions of Choi being an adopted family member seemed to have been easily dealt with, while people like Mochizuki-sensei have asserted to me personally that he believed that Choi was probably a servant of Sokaku.

During Sokaku's lifetime, (before the popularity of aikido) while he had many important people as short term students, Sokaku himself was not a very well known teacher. It certainly couldn't have been Choi's idea to use Sokaku's name to promote himself in post Japanese occupation Korea. Not only would people have not known or cared who Takeda was, but the climate was one where such connections were more likely to make this an unpopular connection.

I also have suspicions about the widely spread interview of Choi which was circulated so long after his death. How do we know that this interview is actually comprised of his words? The content leaves me sceptical.

These are just my observations but I have personally studied both arts under senior practitioners and I think very few people who speak to this subject have.

Greetings

Your comments seem very insightfull.

I really can't figure out why the Daito Ryu crowd cant seem to substanciate Choi's relationship to Takeda with some sort of proof.

People with first hand knowledge never seem to come foward, if Choi was a servant and a student many people would have seen him over the 25-30 years they were together etc.??????????

[Hapkido Student]

Can some one please break down these term's into what each branch is. It would make thing's alot easier...:) Thank's ( sorry for being slow on this I just wanna learn more).


Thank's In advance

[MJR]

I really can't figure out why the Daito Ryu crowd cant seem to substanciate Choi's relationship to Takeda with some sort of proof.

People with first hand knowledge never seem to come foward, if Choi was a servant and a student many people would have seen him over the 25-30 years they were together etc.??????????

Stanley Pranin, then of Aiki News and now editor of the Aikidojournal.com, at the behest of people like myself who had asked similar questions, asked Ueshiba Kisshomaru about Choi Yong Sool and hapkido:

“ AikiNews: It is true that a Korean named “Choi” who founded ‘hapkido” studied Aikido or Daito-ryu?

Doshu:I don’t know what art it was but I understand that there was a young Korean of about 17 or 18 who participated in a seminar of Sokaku Takeda-sensei held in Ashikawa City in Hokkaido. It seems that he studied the art together with my father and would refer to him as his “senior”.

AikiNews: If that’s the case the art must have been Daito-ryu.

Doshu: I’ve heard that this man who studied daito-ryu had some contact with my father after that. Then he returned to Korea and began teaching Daito-ryu on a modest scale. The art gradually became popular and many Koreans trained with him. Since aikido became popular in Japan he called his art ‘Hapkido’ (Written with the same Chinese characters as Aikido). Then the art split into many schools before anyone realized it. This is what my father told me. I once received a letter from this teacher after my father’s death.”
- Aiki News Magazine No. 77

This is one of the few things that I have found affirming the existance of Choi in Japan by a person who was actually in a position to know.

What has really hurt the credibility of many seeking information about Choi is the citing of many things which are easily proven false. If Choi was an adopted family member that is something that Takeda Tokimune would have easily been able to confirm. The story, in that postumously published interview with Choi, makes claims concerning Takeda Sokaku's death which fly in the face of the facts. ( Takeda obviously didn’t starve himself to death due to the fact that the Japanese lost WWII and then told Choi to return to his homeland as it is well known that Takeda Sokaku died in 1943 while traveling to teach budo on 25 April 1943 at Amori Station in Honshu. )

During the early days of my training, and I think this is true for most practitioners who didn't begin in the art yesterday, the art of hapkido was always represented to myself and others as being of 100% Korean origin and was something that was maintained in temples, etc. It is only something of the last 10 to 15 years to see practitioners of the art actually trying to legitimize links with Japanese aikijujutsu.

It is actually only a short time ago that the role of Daito-ryu was greatly minimized in the mainline history of Japanese aikido. The shame is that in an effort to promote the art in some way or use information to one's personal advantage the senior hapkido teachers who may each have some very interesting information about the real roots or connections of the arts may pass away without ever sharing this information accurately for prosperity.

[American HKD]

Stanley Pranin, then of Aiki News and now editor of the Aikidojournal.com, at the behest of people like myself who had asked similar questions, asked Ueshiba Kisshomaru about Choi Yong Sool and hapkido:

“ AikiNews: It is true that a Korean named “Choi” who founded ‘hapkido” studied Aikido or Daito-ryu?

Doshu:I don’t know what art it was but I understand that there was a young Korean of about 17 or 18 who participated in a seminar of Sokaku Takeda-sensei held in Ashikawa City in Hokkaido. It seems that he studied the art together with my father and would refer to him as his “senior”.

AikiNews: If that’s the case the art must have been Daito-ryu.

Doshu: I’ve heard that this man who studied daito-ryu had some contact with my father after that. Then he returned to Korea and began teaching Daito-ryu on a modest scale. The art gradually became popular and many Koreans trained with him. Since aikido became popular in Japan he called his art ‘Hapkido’ (Written with the same Chinese characters as Aikido). Then the art split into many schools before anyone realized it. This is what my father told me. I once received a letter from this teacher after my father’s death.”
- Aiki News Magazine No. 77

This is one of the few things that I have found affirming the existance of Choi in Japan by a person who was actually in a position to know.

What has really hurt the credibility of many seeking information about Choi is the citing of many things which are easily proven false. If Choi was an adopted family member that is something that Takeda Tokimune would have easily been able to confirm. The story, in that postumously published interview with Choi, makes claims concerning Takeda Sokaku's death which fly in the face of the facts. ( Takeda obviously didn’t starve himself to death due to the fact that the Japanese lost WWII and then told Choi to return to his homeland as it is well known that Takeda Sokaku died in 1943 while traveling to teach budo on 25 April 1943 at Amori Station in Honshu. )

During the early days of my training, and I think this is true for most practitioners who didn't begin in the art yesterday, the art of hapkido was always represented to myself and others as being of 100% Korean origin and was something that was maintained in temples, etc. It is only something of the last 10 to 15 years to see practitioners of the art actually trying to legitimize links with Japanese aikijujutsu.

It is actually only a short time ago that the role of Daito-ryu was greatly minimized in the mainline history of Japanese aikido. The shame is that in an effort to promote the art in some way or use information to one's personal advantage the senior hapkido teachers who may each have some very interesting information about the real roots or connections of the arts may pass away without ever sharing this information accurately for prosperity.

Greetings,

Thanks for the info.

Actually Choi called the art "Yawara or Yu Sool" in the begining of his carreer in Korean, also it's 100% true that the art split into several schools within 5-10 years after Choi started teaching the art.

It's quite remarkable how so many students of Choi with relatively little training seemed to jump on this systems band wagon and break it apart in such a short time and try to attach so many false histories. That blows my mind! :confused:

Choi & Ji Han Jae tried a couple of times to unify HKD into one system under one set of guide lines but it never was fully realized, Kido Hae, Korea Hapkido Assoc.

[mike-IHF]

Doshu:I don’t know what art it was but I understand that there was a young Korean of about 17 or 18 who participated in a seminar of Sokaku Takeda-sensei held in Ashikawa City in Hokkaido. It seems that he studied the art together with my father and would refer to him as his “senior”.

I have always wondered about the possible relationship with Ueshiba. I mean I know that there has been little pieces of information about it, but I've always wondered if it was more than what people think. How about you guys?

[Thomas]

During the early days of my training, and I think this is true for most practitioners who didn't begin in the art yesterday, the art of hapkido was always represented to myself and others as being of 100% Korean origin and was something that was maintained in temples, etc. It is only something of the last 10 to 15 years to see practitioners of the art actually trying to legitimize links with Japanese aikijujutsu.


I think this is a very good point (as well as the follow-up that Master Rosenberg added).

When I studied Hapkido in Korea, I learned the "100% Korean art passed down by the guardians of the Buddhist temples" story.

This was further backed up by GM In Kwang-Sik Myung's book "Hapkido Special Self Protection Techniques" (Seolim Publishing: 1993, English and Korean), he writes of the history of Hapkido and states"

"Hapkido was introduced to Korea along with Buddhism. Hapkido techniques were originally known and handed down through the heirarchy of monks, ruling families and royal officials as a means of self protection and personal safety."(p. 21)

I've also seen the story that he went to a cave and studied for several years and came out with "Hapkido".

I think it's a good thing today that many practitioners are looking to find the real roots of the art... unbiased. The people here in the Hapkido forum at MAP have really opened my eyes to a lot of sources and ideas that I wouldn't have thought or learned about otherwise. Thanks all!

[American HKD]

Greetings


...........During the early days of my training, and I think this is true for most practitioners who didn't begin in the art yesterday, the art of hapkido was always represented to myself and others as being of 100% Korean origin and was something that was maintained in temples, etc. It is only something of the last 10 to 15 years to see practitioners of the art actually trying to legitimize links with Japanese aikijujutsu..........


I disagree for the most part.

1. Choi Yong Sool always maintained what he taught was Yawara/Yu Sool from Japan. Only later in his like did he use the name HKD.

2. Ji Han Jae always credited the Japanese root system as well.

Forgive me for being very blunt here many opportunists like, HSM, ISS, JBL, and others fabricated the ridiculus Korean history to popularize this Art with the Korean people.

Of course over time many began to believe these lies.

[nj_howard]

Hello Mr Rogers, excellent post.
Those that say that Choi Yong Sul did not practise kicking are also incorrect as footage of Choi shows him kicking, conservatively but over his own waist and quite limberly for a man of his age. However it is also false to sat that daito-ryu has no kicking as kicking is of great importance in daito-ryu. It is just that the targets are conservative and some times the aims of such kicks are different than in hapkido. It would be more correct to say that neither Choi Yong Sool nor Daito-ryu employed the dramatic high kicks seen in today's hapkido dojangs. (And which I, incidentally, feel are of great worth.)
This is quite consistent with other information that can be substantiated. For example, Jungki Hapkido uses ten basic kicks, most of which are to points below the waist. GM Lim learned these kicks from Choi.

When I was in Japan in 2002 this was a topic still very much alive and yet there seems to me a lack of new infomation. Assertions of Choi being an adopted family member seemed to have been easily dealt with, while people like Mochizuki-sensei have asserted to me personally that he believed that Choi was probably a servant of Sokaku.
imo his information has significant potential value in the ongoing research into Choi's experience in Japan. If the gentleman you refer to could be interviewed on record, I think that would be very helpful.

During Sokaku's lifetime, (before the popularity of aikido) while he had many important people as short term students, Sokaku himself was not a very well known teacher. It certainly couldn't have been Choi's idea to use Sokaku's name to promote himself in post Japanese occupation Korea. Not only would people have not known or cared who Takeda was, but the climate was one where such connections were more likely to make this an unpopular connection.
I definitely agree with this line of reasoning. To me it's simple common sense that Choi could not have concocted his entire story. It seems indisputable that he spent many years in Japan, however he got there. It is absolutely indisputable that he was a highly accomplished martial artist upon his return to Korea.

I also have suspicions about the widely spread interview of Choi which was circulated so long after his death. How do we know that this interview is actually comprised of his words? The content leaves me sceptical..
Yes, there are many things about that interview that are controversial, to say the least. For example, some have interpreted the interview to say that Choi claimed that Takeda committed suicide, and that Choi was his second. That, of course, is patently false.

It's really encouraging to see a civil, reasoned discussion of this subject, which remains inconclusive in spite of all of the efforts to resolve it. Perhaps one day...

In that regard, I read a while back that Choi's daughter is about to publish a book of memoirs, and that the book will discuss Choi's life in Japan, including time he spent with Takeda. Let's hope that the book is published, is translated into English and might put to rest many of the doubts about Choi's biography.

Regards...

[hapkiyoosool]

Originally Posted by MJR
Those that say that Choi Yong Sul did not practise kicking are also incorrect as footage of Choi shows him kicking, conservatively but over his own waist and quite limberly for a man of his age. However it is also false to sat that daito-ryu has no kicking as kicking is of great importance in daito-ryu. It is just that the targets are conservative and some times the aims of such kicks are different than in hapkido. It would be more correct to say that neither Choi Yong Sool nor Daito-ryu employed the dramatic high kicks seen in today's hapkido dojangs. (And which I, incidentally, feel are of great worth.)

When I was in Japan in 2002 this was a topic still very much alive and yet there seems to me a lack of new infomation. Assertions of Choi being an adopted family member seemed to have been easily dealt with, while people like Mochizuki-sensei have asserted to me personally that he believed that Choi was probably a servant of Sokaku.

During Sokaku's lifetime, (before the popularity of aikido) while he had many important people as short term students, Sokaku himself was not a very well known teacher. It certainly couldn't have been Choi's idea to use Sokaku's name to promote himself in post Japanese occupation Korea. Not only would people have not known or cared who Takeda was, but the climate was one where such connections were more likely to make this an unpopular connection.

I also have suspicions about the widely spread interview of Choi which was circulated so long after his death. How do we know that this interview is actually comprised of his words? The content leaves me sceptical.. Hello Mr Rogers, excellent post.

This is quite consistent with other information that can be substantiated. For example, Jungki Hapkido uses ten basic kicks, most of which are to points below the waist. GM Lim learned these kicks from Choi.


imo his information has significant potential value in the ongoing research into Choi's experience in Japan. If the gentleman you refer to could be interviewed on record, I think that would be very helpful.


I definitely agree with this line of reasoning. To me it's simple common sense that Choi could not have concocted his entire story. It seems indisputable that he spent many years in Japan, however he got there. It is absolutely indisputable that he was a highly accomplished martial artist upon his return to Korea.


Yes, there are many things about that interview that are controversial, to say the least. For example, some have interpreted the interview to say that Choi claimed that Takeda committed suicide, and that Choi was his second. That, of course, is patently false.

It's really encouraging to see a civil, reasoned discussion of this subject, which remains inconclusive in spite of all of the efforts to resolve it. Perhaps one day...

In that regard, I read a while back that Choi's daughter is about to publish a book of memoirs, and that the book will discuss Choi's life in Japan, including time he spent with Takeda. Let's hope that the book is published, is translated into English and might put to rest many of the doubts about Choi's biography.

Regards...
Here here!
I totally agree that Hapkido is the child of Daito-Ryu. The Choi interviews are sometimes a bit hokey.
Our style is about as close to Daito-Ryu as you can get. Our federation President (Grandmaster Young-Shil Chang) goes to Japan from our Korean HQ and trains with the Daito-Ryu and it's evident in the videos on our website. Some of the videos do show some flashy kicks, they are just for the fun of the demos we do in Korea to entertain the crowd, "Look, we can kick too!" :) . We had a Representitive from Japan come to the Grand opening of our dojang in Korea, 1968. We have a strong Japanese influence, thus the Hakakma we wear. As for the non-dramtic kicks, why kick them when you've already ripped their arm off?? :woo: "Ooh, that had to hurt!"

[ramonnavarro123]

Hi and be blessed mountainsage
My name is Ramon Navarro and I teach HapKiDo now for almost 29 years and have Black Belts in TaeKwonDo and TangSooDo from early ´70 and been teaching HapKiDo since 1977. My teacher Great Teacher or as they are called Grand Master SongIL Park 9th Dan and founder of Song Moo Kwan HapKiDo a direct student of Grand Masster Ji, HanJae HapKiDo founder or as he is known father of modern HapKiDo.
He, Master Ji came to Panama invited by Master Park in october 1996 and I had a caht with about many HapKiDo themes and he said that the name HapKiDo shortened by him not to say created or chosen to be used for what he formed as HapKiDo is ! That he learned Yawara or Daito Ryu HapKi Yu Kwon Sul and it had very litle ammount of kicks. They were low kicks and front, side back and roundhouse kicks to mid body and in total basically were 12 kicks.
HapKiDo was the name given by Ji HanJae as he elarned them in TaeKyun, all types of kicks, flying (distance jumping), spining, jumping (high jump), spin jumping and special kicks too.
Would like to continue but need to go out runing an errand for the office (I am the boss but must set the example) so all take care

HAP

Ramon Navarro
HapKiDo SabomNim
Song Moo Kwan HapKiDo
Panama republic of Panama

[ramonnavarro123]

Hi SilverDragon and be blessed.

It is correct that Master Choi only tought Yawara the nickname to HapKiYuKwonSul that was the name to describe Daito Ryu AikiYuYutsu that he learned form Master Takeda and Master Choi was Master Ji´s teacher since 1949 or so. After time Master Ji learned TaeKyun and lets say mixed this 2 martial arts taking out what Master Ji beleived was not usefull and to make a long story short called this new art based principally on HapKiYuKownSul renamed HapKiDo shortening the name so it could be easier to recall by the general public in Korea and as you said: In my words, HapKiDo is diferent than what Master Choi tought that had almost no kicks and the kicks that he used were low kicks plus front, side, roundhouse and back kicks.

Take care, SilverDragon.

HAP !


Ramon Navarro
HapKiDo SabomNim
Song Moo Kwan HapKiDo
Panama Republic of Panama

[Dave Humm]

Master Choi's Hapkido is almost IDENTICAL to Daito Ryu.

...Almost ALL of the projections, misdirections, kick, punch and knife defences are unchanged from their source. Although many things have been added to Hapkido, dynamic twisting is dynamic twisting period. Whatever your friends are showing you, it is NOT classical Hapkido.

Next you will be saying that Aikido has nothing to do with Daito Ryu and their techniques are but marginally related!Let me begin by stating I've never studied Hapkido (in any format) I am a student of Aikikai Aikido (of 18 years) holding affiliation to Aikido Hombu Dojo in Japan. I quantify my comments here based on three elements

1, My long term study of an art derived from the teachings of Ueshiba M. who we know was a student of Takeda S.

2, My experiences of mainline Daito Ryu (although minimal)

3, The definitive statements within your last post (as quoted above)

Ok, firstly I'm a little confused. I'm being informed that, and I quote "Master Choi's Hapkido is almost IDENTICAL to Daito Ryu" If that is in fact the case why then is the art known as Hapkido and not (as would be a far better description) "Choi-ha Daito Ryu"?

Secondly, what differences are there to the teachings of Takeda Sokaku and those of "Master Choi" to warrant the comment of "almost IDENTICAL" ? I would have to challenge you to provide documented evidence, a source of material that would quantify your statement.

Was Master Choi issued a Menkyo or Menkyo Kaiden from Takeda Sokaku authorising him to formally teach applications and techniques from within the Daito ryu ? (Regardless of what Master Choi decided to call the art he taught)

Who formally penned the name HAPKIDO in relation to the art known as such?

In respect of your comment relating to Aikido. And again I quote "...Aikido has nothing to do with Daito Ryu and their techniques are but marginally related"

The term Aiki has been in existence longer than God's dog, certainly long before O Sensei walked this planet so, he didn't invent this aspect of his art, he merely penned the name after a considerable period of physical and philosophical development.

Although it is a fair and accurate assumption to link Aikido with Daito Ryu, it is also very true to say that aikido has developed a thousand fold from the early days when the founder offered is eccentric teachings to his students, whilst the general format of waza (technique) remains constant the development in terms of technical understanding is well beyond what was known 50 or 70 years ago, and that's on top of what Ueshiba O Sensei already applied in conjunction with his knowledge of Daito Ryu and at least two sword schools and the rest of his considerable Budo.

When we look at Aikijutsu and Aikido we see stark differences and stark similarities, but they are not the same physically or philosophically. If we look at aikido say 50 years ago when it first arrived here in the UK with Kenshiro Abbe, then look at it now guess what we see so; whilst aikido draws upon several influences for its existence, Daito Ryu being just one component, it doesn't however rely solely upon it for credibility thusly it is inaccurate to only refer to Aikido as a derivative of Daito Ryu or insinuate that it's waza, principles and philosophy are those of Daito Ryu. I think you'll find many differences.

Regards

[JimH]

Dave,
I do not profess to be an historian of the Arts just a student and I would like to point out the following in relation to your comments:

Choi did call his art Daito Ryu Aiki Jujitsu( Hapki yoo sool,the Korean term for Aikijujitsu) and it was changed over time.

There are other Koreans who have paper work from Takeda allowing them to teach and yet there is no mention of these men in the Daito Ryu Lineage,Choi had said he had paper work and it was stolen,even if false some of these qualified Koreans do say they did see Choi training,so that is a form of qualifier.

Would not the history of Ueshiba be limited if we only speak of his aikido,as he also did teach pure Daito ryu ,called aikjujitsu,aiki Budo,then Aikido and then changed the teachings over time, and changed the teachings also many times over.
(it is also said that Takeda never issued Ueshiba a Menkyo status,as Ueshiba has been documented to have trained less than 100 days with Takeda and never a Menkyo kaiden,as Takeda only ever issued two Menkyo Kaiden)

All these rankings are suspect,so do we discard that which these men have done and the arts they formed or do we search and research to find and prove what is or is not the truth?

Quote:
"Daito Ryu being just one component, it doesn't however rely solely upon it for credibility thusly it is inaccurate to only refer to Aikido as a derivative of Daito Ryu."

While it is true that Ueshiba studied other Ryu's ,it is said by him in articles that once he found Daito Ryu he discarded all the other knowledge he had and drove head on into learning Daito Ryu,this is why he became a live student,even if only for the short time he was with Takeda.

If one looks at the teachings of Masters like Kondo (Daito ryu) and then one looks at the teachings of the various aspects of Aikido and the aspects of Hapkido (especially from students of Choi who did not alter his teachings) and we look at the Hapkido taught and influenced by GM Ji Han Jae,one who truly sees the teachings of all those mentioned cannot help but see the roots ,the similar techniques used for the same defenses/offensive moves.

Similar is an obvious word as even when we look at Masters taught by the same person,the interpretation differs from person to person,not greatly but with some variations ,so Similar is a correct word.

[Dave Humm]

Hi Jim,

Thanks for your clarification.

The qualifier here for me in Shadow Warrior's post is that he is stating that Master Choi's technique is (was) "Almost Identical" to that of Daito Ryu, I think its a fair assumption as a third party looking in on that comment, that what Choi was teaching, was in effect Daito Ryu; Indeed you confirmed as much however, Aikido is not Daito Ryu, it has never been even though it is influenced by it.

Look at Iwama Ryu Aikido. The form of aikido which is accepted as being the most technically accurate form of the art, most notably (and possibly controversially) the form of the art which remains unchanged in its waza since it was taught to Saito M. Despite the fact that Saito M. has preserved the teachings as passed to him by the founder through their 40 year relationship, the waza of Iwama Ryu is still different to that of Daito Ryu, it had already undergone changes and development thus, despite the various name changes, the art has never been known (to my knowledge) as a 'jutsu' although I will make it my business to research that point and correct myself if my present information is incorrect.

May I ask how many different methods of Hapkido there are ? I ask because all of the limited exposure I've had to the art, both in electronic media and in watching real life training at the local sports centre, clearly indicates that what I've seen isn't Daito Ryu; Indeed if I had to draw a comparative influence, I'd have said that what I was watching was aikido performed in Korean clothing under the name of Hapkido.

Regards

[Moridin]

I'd have said that what I was watching was aikido performed in Korean clothing under the name of Hapkido.

Plus they have the kicks with it?

[JimH]

I would say I have to agree,Aikido and Hapkido do look similar as the root art is the same,but if an Akidoist who trains and then finds that to be more realistic the circle must be made smaller,the technique must be made shorter,the strikes must be made and be real,if that person showed his changes they would also be Hapkido and they would allso be Daito Ryu.

Having been a 5 year practioner of aikido under the Aikikai of New York and Having been to many seminars and demonstrations I find much similarity of True Aikido and True Hapkido,it is in the employment of the technique that one finds the differences.

I have done Aikido by Yamada,I have done Tomiki aikido by Wantanabee,I have seen Tenshin aikido by Seagal,I have seen Aiki jujistsu by Ibarra,I have seen hapkido by in Sun seo,I have done Hapkido by a live in student of Choi's, Chin Il Chang,I have also seen Video of Daito ryu's Kondo and when I look at these various arts I see the same techniques,against the same attacks,with the only differences being intent towards the attacker and the distances used,the rest,application, is the same.

It is funny that you say when you viewed Hapkido you saw Aikido,would this not be due to your knowledge and experiences in aikido?
Because Kano had written that when he saw Ueshiba's Aikido he saw JUDO,so I think that we, as observers, tend to see and gravitate towards a known rather than an unknown.

Again if Kano's representation of Daito Ryu is true then what we as Hapkidoist and Aikidoist do is truely from the same source,
(The source can be Daito Ryu,which all the creators claim their arts are from,but we also ,as said,must look at the additional aspects added by all,Takeda had time under other instructors,Ueshiba had time under others,Ji Han Jae had time under others as did most creators)
But
The Base art of all are tied together and can truly be seen if one looks at them in entirety rather than in specifics.

Saito is mentioned and it is said the he never called his art a jutsu,but isn't his art a dedication to Ueshiba and Iwama was the place most special to Ueshiba,so the school is thus named.
Saito began as a student when Ueshiba had experienced his enlightenmnet so the art that Saito shows is as the founder finished it and looking at the videos available by and of Saito,again, I see much similiarity between his Aikido,Kondo's Daito ryu and Choi's Hapkido.

Again I am just a student, so my observations are from the perspective of a student who has experienced these arts and sees the similarities (I will say similarities over exact but I am not on the level nor the varied experise as MJR),but again my vision is scewed as I look to see the similarities rather than the differences.

I appreciate the discussion,Thank You.

[Dave Humm]

I appreciate the discussion,Thank You.Jim, my pleasure.

I myself studied at Yamada's Dojo in New York during November & December of 2000, an absolute pleasure to train with Sugano and Yamada Sensei.

Regards

[hapkiyoosool]

Dear Dave,

Just for your pleasure. ^_^

Here are some clips of the Hapkido I learned growing up in Korea.
I think you may find it very interesting. :)
Hapkido of Chang Young-Shil. (http://www.hapkiyoosool.com/video.htm)

Chang young-Shil started his training under Ji Han-Jae from around the early 50's until the late 60's when GM Ji left to America. To my knowledge, GM Ji had not changed the art of Choi at that time while GM Chang was studying with GM Ji. GM Chang then continued to teach the military on base with Han Bong-Soo and then GM Han left to America. GM Chang then joined forces with Myung Jae-Nam and finally created his own style of Hapkido and opened a school in 1968.
You will see on our website a grand opening picture on the index page taken at that time. Master Masuda from Aikikai is sitting with GM Chang and GM Myung in the second row behind the children.

In Korean our school was called "Han Kuk Hapkisool Hoi" which translates into English/Japanese as "Korean Aikijujutsu Association". He has been teaching the same techniques ever since. GM Chang changed the name to "International Hapkido Federation", it had become a way (do) of life to him and not just technique (jutsu).

GM Han, GM Myung, and GM Chang all use "International Hapkido Federation" to this day.

I am not sure if you know this but, if you take the calligraphy of Hapkido and show it to a Japanese person, they read it Aikido. I do not mean to insult anyone's intelligence. Koreans pronounce the same characters differntly and teach according to their different culture. It has been changed a bit to adapt to the Korean way of thinking. We do teach kicks (about 10) and strikes to pressure points.
http://www.hapkiyoosool.com/images/HapkidoCH.jpg

This does not make it "better or worse". Just different.
Like the coffee in Europe and the coffee in America.
Different taste, same ingredients.

[Dave Humm]

Thank you for the clips, I did indeed find them very interesting; had I not known they were of Hapkido, I would have seen Aikido.

I wonder if you would kindly explain the rational behind the statement.. "Hapkido is a Korean Martial Art"

I'd also like to add that I'm not attempting to start a flame war on this subject, I am genuinely interested as clearly the three systems are very closely connected however, I make no apologies for expressing opinion, sometimes controversially so, however, rest assured I'm not an antagonist, just some one looking to further understand the relationship between Daito Ryu, Hapkido and Aikido.

I ask my question based on a simple logic; I'm sure however there is an equally simply counter-logic and I'd be interested in learning it.

My logic is as such; Based upon Shadow Warriors earlier post stating that Master Choi's Hapkido was "almost identical" to Daito Ryu what qualifies (whomever) to call "it" Hapkido (which has already been clearly pointed out that the written form translates to Ai Ki Do to Japanese readers).. As a Korean Art? Indeed the Characters for Daito Ryu are quite different to that of Hapkido/Aikido so I'm confused as to why, given the similarity of systems (Hapkido/Daito Ryu) why characters identical to those of Aikido are used considering that Daito Ryu is a Jujutsu and not "-do".

If the curricula was indeed almost identical to Daito Ryu, and that a number of additional aspects such as kicks were subsequently added by the Korean exponents, what proportion of 'additional' techniques are there, say percentage wise to the existing Daito Ryu system.. 10-20-50% ? Surely this doesn't qualify as to changing the system enough to warrant calling it Korean in origin?

I suppose the issue here is geography, had those Korean students been Japanese, who then went on to alter/develop their knowledge in to something else, we'd have several core founder's of aiki based arts as apposed to just one. That said, geography aside; I'm still left unsure about this point simply because had the early pioneers of British Aikido in the 1950's begun to call Aikido something else, then claim that it was indeed a "British Martial Art" there'd be (as far as I'm concerned) a major issue with credibility.

I've trained with almost all of the early students of British Aikido, those whom were involved with Kenshiro Abbe Sense, one thing which is quite evident from their training and recollections of their own study, is that Aikido was far more 'jutsu' in the "old days" including kicks, strikes and a martial attitude which, some might say is lacking in many aikido dojo today. My point being is that although it has been pointed out here that additional aspects were added to the curricula learned from Takeda Sokaku (by his Korean students) Those aspects were/are likewise seen in at least some aikido organisations today, again; another point is that Aikido is not and never has been billed as Daito Ryu or "almost identical" too it.

I read somewhere, possibly within this forum that had "hapkido" as we know it been originally billed as a Japanese art aka Daito Ryu, that many Koreans wouldn’t have had any interest in it, would you agree or disagree with this statement? Perhaps (given the identical nature of Hapkido/Aikido characters) you might advise me how close the Korean/Japanese languages are and how given the Jutsu nature of Daito Ryu, when and how "-do" was used in Hapkido

Regards

[JimH]

Hi Dave,
I understand your point.

When Choi brought Daito Ryu to Korea after the War ,after the Japanese occupation,the Koreans were all about distancing themselves from Japanese arts and occupation so all things took on a Korean approach.

Choi taught Daito Ryu,even after adding a few kicks from Korean Taekyun,the art he taught remained Daito Ryu,the name was changed to the Koreanized Yoo Sool ,Korean for Jujitsu,as time went on the name was changed to Yoo Sool Hapki dojang.

GM Ji Han Jae who was a student of Choi began to teach Daito ryu/yoo Sool,he added more kicks,meditation and weapons to the system and he felt the name Yoo Sool Hapki dojang was too long so he termed the name Hapkido,since the other Do's ,like Tae Kwon do were so prevelant.

If we look at the Other Korean arts that also came about at the time many took the Japanese arts ,such as shotokan and altered the Kicks and labeled them under tha banner Tae kwon do.
Many Early Korean masters to the US used to call their Arts Korean Karate and they said that what they taught was Shotokan,or what ever Japanese art it truly was.

As with most Japanese arts,one must stay loyal to the founder and the Federation to gain rank and to be allowed to use the name of that system and be under their banner,as Many changes took place and as many arts names changed and evolved in Japanese styles,we see the same thing in the Korean styles.

In Korean arts they split and change and develop into various federations but they stay under their banner names for recognition purposes,
Most Hapkido Federations still keep Hapkido as their Banner art and the many Linear arts all stay under the Tae Kwon Do Banner although the federations change the forms or the various aspects of the arts.

Had Choi never returned to Korea,and had he stayed in Japan,he may have taught Daito Ryu or perhaps he would have seen the changes made by Ueshiba and went in the direction of Aikido,but that was not the case an he returned to Korea,taught Daito Ryu ,which a student ,GM Ji Han Jae,popularized as Hapkido.

This is a rough explanation from my readings on the history and from converations with first generation students of Choi.

[Dave Humm]

Hi Jim,

Thanks for the continued dialogue :) So, if originally, the art was essentially Daito Ryu penned under a Korean name (for the reasons you give) are there schools of "Hapkido" which still remain fairly true to the early teachings of Choi or, are most of the schools teaching the art more akin to Aikido movement, indeed how many formats of Hapkido exist ?

I ask this because virtually all the exposure I've had to Hapkido (granted visual not hands on) appears to be almost 'another style' of aikido and, unless I was told otherwise (from your good self for instance) I would have never understood that the origins of the art were Daito Ryu and not, as an onlooker with experience in aikido might be excused for thinking; Hapkido was a derivative of Aikido. Especially given the same characters used for the name.

Thanks again.

Regards

[shadow warrior]

No end to this joke!

It seems to me that the LESS anything has evolved from GM Choi's original sets of techniques the less it can be called a Korean martial art at all! It is only a transported version of DAJJ.

GM Ji facilitated the expansion of techniques sets through his own experiences, those of fellow GM Choi students, as well as those of his own early students. During the early sixties the Korean martial art scene was fluid, to say the least! There were numerous talented Korean martial artists who competed and shared ideas and skills.

If Hapkido is to have a unique Korean identity in the martial arts community, maybe the name Hapkido should be applied only to the expanded skill sets which were recognized under the old Korean Hapkido Association of the mid to late 60's. Not the DAJJ version of GM Choi.

That might make most people happy!

As far as the way Hapkido is written, the Japanese used the old Chinese forms as a basis of their form. They borrowed it, just like the Korean's.

You can get very tired of tilling the same ground, when everyone knows the crop!

K. Stewart

[Dave Humm]

No end to this joke!

and..

That might make most people happy!

and..

You can get very tired of tilling the same ground, when everyone knows the crop!

K. StewartMaybe I'm missing your point Mr. Stewart. Perhaps your elaboration might serve to educate rather than leave me with a strong impression of sarcasm.

I've gone to lengths to explain both the logic and reasoning behind my genuine questions, hoping for a reasonable discussion; if you have nothing you wish to add to the preceding posts of mine, Jim's etc so be it, I have no issue with you, but please, leave the 'attitude' off this thread.

Regards

[shadow warrior]

Mr. Humm:

I addressed your take on this well worn path directly, with a cut and dried explanation.

Every so often the debate over Hapkido lineage, roots, origins, opinions and history gets rehashed, chewed up and otherwise posted again.

You did indeed miss ALL of my points.

I offered you a solution to the diverse lines, which you failed to pick up on.

Don't call GM Choi's art Korean Hapkido, because it is at least 95% DAJJ. In addition, GM Choi's kicking was from a Japanese mechanical lineage not TaeKyon, (a southern Chinese/Korean influenced method). Kicking is not just kicking, there are numerous methods.

Given that GM Ji coined the term Hapkido, and offered it to GM Choi out of respect, does not mean the original GM Choi DAJJ techniques changed!

For better or worse (depending on which lineage camp people are in), it was GM Ji who "started" the evolution of the Korean art of Hapkido from the late 50's. This does not mean that original twisting- self defence techniques were cast aside, but many more skill sets were explored from a Korean perspective! (Particularly striking and free fighting). In addition, this does not mean that all people who claim to teach Hapkido are teaching anything from GM Choi original skill sets!

Anyone who has been in Hapkido for any significant length of time knows this! Even a casual check on other boards such as budo seek or Hapkido info-net will produce answers to basic lineage questions (common knowledge).

Certain lines of Hapkido are NOT DAJJ, Aikido or for that matter Tae Kwon Do in their perspective.

It is quite telling that you mistook my input as sacasm.

Hapkido (the word), has not been a single style for many decades, most people know this.

This why many of us in this art get tired of explaining the same things over and over again for years. We have agreed to disagree on this point.

Attitude is something you might take a look at yourself. You missed not only my main points, but information which is known to most in the Hapkido community, including the origin of the original way of writing Hapkido (from Chinese not Japanese).

K. Stewart
Haed Instructor
East West Hapkido

[JimH]

Hi Dave,
I know of two Hapkido Grand Masters that Teach the traditional art of Choi:
GM Chin Il Chang,New York
and
GM RIM,Maryland.

I had opportunity to study with GM Chin Il Chang,I have read about and heard about GM Rim.

I am sure there are other first generation students of Choi who maintained the purity of his teachings.

I also came across this explanation of names used for Choi's art:

Choi called it 'yawara' at first. Then 'Dai Dong Ryu Yu Sool', the Korean equivalent of Daito-Ryu Aikijujitsu. Many of Choi's students had backgrounds from other martial arts, and Korean names were desired rather than Japanese names. So it became 'Dai Dong Ryu Yu Kwon Sool', then 'Hapki Yu Kwon Sool', then eventually 'Hapkido'.

[Hapkidoin P]

Well done Dave..you've managed to stir up the hornets nest.. :D :)

Just a reminder to all of us Hapkidoin..we simply DO NOT know what Art Choi Doju-nim brought back with him. The simple use of his term "yawara" to identify his art casts serious doubts as to the art being DRAJJ..as such as DRAJJ was never identified as a style/system of yawara. The techniques of DRAJJ never having been codified until 1922 or so. Not to say that yawara wasn't a form of JMA..it's just that DRAJJ wasn't known or identified as such. So there's no use getting riled up over pure speculation,yes?

In some circles it is thought that DRAJJ as an JMA never existed until Sokaku Takeda breathed life into it..which is in itself an entirely different can of worms.

Just as an add-on..there are many different Kwan of Hapkido today..some are very "Aiki" in approach to technique and some are almost TKD-esque with some joint locks thrown in. It's very much a grab-bag when talking about technical differences and similarities between the groups.

[Dave Humm]

Well done Dave..you've managed to stir up the hornets nest.. :D :) Hi Paul, it seems there's only one person contributing to this thread with their knickers in a twist, and I can assure you, me it isn't.

Up to Mr. Stewart's posts both myself and Jim were having a good discussion on the origins of Hapikido, I don't see a hornet's nest in that at all, and if I'm supposed to automatically know these things simply because the topic has been debated before well.. I offer my apologies for my ignorance however; ignorance or not, providing questions are presented in an adult manor with a point and a genuine intent, I see no reason for them to be left unanswered, (or at least redirected to previous threads on the subject) now, in the case of Mr. Stewart who clearly indicates this subject has been "..rehashed, chewed up and otherwise posted again" I have a single piece of advice. Stop posting if you feel this way, no one forces you to press the 'Submit Reply' button.

Remembering earlier in this thread I clearly indicated that my intent was not to start a flame war however, it seems this thread is heading in exactly that direction simply because I exercise my right as a member of this forum to ask questions thus; I bid you guys a fairwell, I can't be arsed wasting my time debating the pro's and con's of a "This has been discussed before" mentality.

Kind regards, and Jim.. Thanks for the information and your time mate :)

[austinso]

What is a sore point for most HKDists including me is the preconceived notion that HKD *can't* be derived from DRAJJ, and then proceed to use joe blow HKD school as the example of how it can't be despite the real possibility that the technical ability of that joe blow school is poor.

What people like yourself should be doing is going to top tier HKD schools whose masters are universally accepted as doing good HKD, and then forming an opinion based on the technique as taught in these dojangs.

There is a compatriot of yours, Rupert Atkinson, who is in Korea, who you may wish to contact about the abilities of a HKDist there (Kim Yong Sang) who continues to teach the tradition of Choi Yong Sool. Since he is also an aikidoka, you may have many things to share with him.

http://aikido-in-korea.com/


Austin

[Dave Humm]

What is a sore point for most HKDists including me is the preconceived notion that HKD *can't* be derived from DRAJJ, and then proceed to use joe blow HKD school as the example of how it can't be despite the real possibility that the technical ability of that joe blow school is poor.Your point is noted and understood however, if you care to actually read my contributions to this thread, you will not find a single entry from me which states that Hapkido (in any format) is not derived from Daito Ryu, I've merely posed some questions relating to its connections with Daito Ryu and, asked for clarification on points in which I was confused or unsure.What people like yourself should be doing is going to top tier HKD schools whose masters are universally accepted as doing good HKD, and then forming an opinion based on the technique as taught in these dojangs.Here is where you begin to dictate what I should be doing, sorry but I don't subscribe to your theory at all, simply because you tar me with the same brush as those individuals you may have previously encountered, I have no desire to study Hapkido, although note; I haven't once questioned the legitimacy or authenticity of the techniques presented to me in this thread, why ? Because that's not either my mandate or purpose for contributing to this thread, I merely enquired about the historical aspects of the system.. Obviously that's a touchy subject for some.There is a compatriot of yours, Rupert Atkinson, who is in Korea, who you may wish to contact about the abilities of a HKDist there (Kim Yong Sang) who continues to teach the tradition of Choi Yong Sool. Since he is also an aikidoka, you may have many things to share with him.Again Austin, I'm not questioning the quality or abilities of Hapkido; merely fascinated with the close relationship between Daito Ryu and Aikido.

As I said in my last post, I had intended to drift off back into the weapons and Aikido forums where I frequent the most however, you raised points which I felt I needed to respond too.

Regards

[JimH]

Dave ,
I appreciate the discussion and see no harm in the discussion.

If we see problems in the historical account of Choi or Takeda,we must admit that we are participants in the after effect,be it DJJ, Aikido,Hapkido, Hankido or any of the arts grown from Choi's teachings.

To those who do not think it comes from DJJ or a Jitsu,then purchase Kondo's DJJ and watch ,you will see our art.

Why should we doubt how long DJJ was around?
Why should we doubt Choi's words on what he learned?
The Art is here and they are the reason.

There is a remote possibility that Choi may have even been a student of Ueshiba,but Ueshiba denied ever knowing Choi.
Did he deny it because Choi may have used another name?
or
Was it done because Ueshiba did not want to be the one to have trained Choi,a Korean?

Ueshiba as Choi's teacher is spoken of on some sites and may be possible,but then we have other Koreans who have certificates from Takeda,so again why should we doubt Choi's word,he learned something along the line of DJJ from some one.

I am sorry I do not see the problem in this discussion,it is a discussion on similarities on the lineage of our art as compared to Aikido and DJJ.

I clearly see the similarities in all three.

Just my two cents

[Dave Humm]

Hi Jim,

Thanks again mate..

I'm now being accused (via PM) of having a hidden agenda for my participation in this thread simply because I include a link to one of my websites in my signature :rolleyes: (lol)

Regards

[JimH]

Dave with over 1300 posts on this forum how long have you had the tag attached?

I did not look at the tag or see your posts as an agenda but I am not a moderator .

If others have tags for schools or equipment then you should be allowed to post and discuss as you want.

I do not know how many Korean artists use the Japanese Sword as the Koreans have come out with their own version of the straighter sword so

What would be the big deal of your tag on a Korean Art site?

I studied Iado and have Japanese swords and have used swords and replicas in aikido but never in TKD or any of my Hapkido trainings (although I see at many TKD schools and some hapkido schools it is growing)

No matter your agenda ?,I enjoy our chats,
Thank You

[Dave Humm]

Jim, as the moderators of at least the Aikido and Weapon's forums will attest, I've always had a link to my dojo website which, up to early February carried specific information about my sword interests/studies and close connections with a leading Budo equipment/Nihonto supplier here in the UK.

This relationship has since expanded and I now officially represent Nine Circles supplying Nihonto and equipment specifically but not limited too the aikido community - I do not however have an agenda.

I think this thread has come to a natural conclusion, it drifted away from the topic and, from your contribution, you have answered/clarified the questions I had. Many thanks :)