Monday, 11 March 2024

Answers to Questions on Nidan Grading Facebook Sharing Post

The following is a series of questions received on my Facebook post sharing the previous blog post on the nidan grading. I found the questions interesting and insightful, and the answers would be a useful contribution to the discussion concerning the development of the Jan de Jong (JDJ) jujutsu grading system.

I am genuinely curious. Were any jujutsu candidates ever required to open Happoken no kata by, after the rei, shifting into an open stance, as often seen in formal demonstrations of other karate kata?

From Jan de Jong: the man, his school and his ju jitsu system (1997): 'Happoken no Kata (Kate of Eight Fists) ... Open by stepping into  kiba-dachi with the left then right leg then punch both fists down in front stopping at hip level' (p. 53).

The opening to JDJ's 'version' of happoken no kata is not as elaborate as that in Yoseikan, which reflects JDJ's focus on the practical.  

And were any jujutsu candidates required to open and close their demonstrations of Kentai ichi no kata with formal, kneeling rei to pass their grading?

The linked post is to the kata being performed by two of Hans de Jong's (HDJ) yudansha. It shows the formal opening and closing of the kata in seiza.

And, not to be too contrarian, but in the spirit of adding information. I was told by JDJ that he would not teach a particular Yoseikan kata of changing techniques because "it set bad habits:" The kata consists of a lengthy series of "changes" in an unrealistic chain. He said that you might need to adjust your intentions once, but that expecting further chances was unrealistic. (Or, maybe more accurately, that's how I interpreted what he said.)

Not sure how the author of the above comment is being contrarian as their comment is in line with mine in the previous post where I stated that JDJ included a 'changing techniques' section in his nidan grading even though he was opposed to the teaching of changing techniques because it initially trained ineffective technique.

The particular Yoseikan kata to which the author refers is Hyori no Kata (form of front and back). See this link for video of the kata

The first time I saw this kata was in a copy of Minoru Mochizuki's book that I obtained from Jan-Erik Karlsson and shared with JDJ (see linked post). The next time was in a two-disk DVD, Yoseikan Sogo Budo by Mochizuki.

I initially found the hyori no kata very interesting, however, I quickly came to the same point of view as JDJ. Why train poor technique? 

Why not train changing techniques, like everyone else does. The rationale, as explained above, is that you initially train poor technique, however, the rationale is also a samurai/warrior approach to combat. Your defensive technique is fully committed, and if that doesn't work, your next defensive technique is fully committed. 100% all the time, every time.

I remember my first introduction to changing techniques and how they were in fashion. It was at a seminar in southern Germany in the late 1980s. I was part of a group of instructors that accompanied JDJ as he was teaching at that seminar. I was ikkyu at that stage. JDJ had not included any changing techniques in his grading system at that stage. Even then I didn't appreciate the methodology. I successfully applied the initial technique to which the other person could not defend against. He said, 'You're not supposed to do that. You're supposed to let me get out of it' (or words to that effect). Yeah, that's not the approach to combat that I had been taught.

And, if asked 'Why is the final sword technique in ken tai ichi no kata that was taught to you, which you graded, and which you now teach, result in a mutual slaying?' my answer would have to be 'It doesn't.' (1. the tenth technique certainly does not result in a mutual slaying. 2. Neither does the fifth technique "as I was taught it." For other readers and for some clarity, I agree with what John has previously said about the fifth technique performed the way he describes it. I did learn the kata, for the first time as a whole set rather than simple sword exercises, from JdJ as he was teaching John and Garth. The 'requirement' to enter directly when performing the fifth technique was not mentioned until several years later.

Don't quite understand what is being said there, however, the fifth sword technique in ken tai ichi no kata as JDJ taught (see above linked post), it was a downwards strike defended with specific instructions. The specific instructions were no evasive body-movement and tori's sword to never be raised higher than uke's neck. This results in a mutual slaying. This should be obvious even without observing the attack and defence.

JDJ was specific in his instructions, and he was right, at least in that regard. It's just that he misremembered the attack. The attack is a straight thrust, as I learned when acquiring the abovementioned Mochizuki videos. 

Watch the abovementioned HDJ yudansha ken tai ichi no kata with the technique in question on slow motion. How does tori avoid being slayed? Through the use of an evasive body-movement. This is how most of the instructors at the Jan de Jong Self Defence School performed the defence, even though JDJ was specific in his instructions - no evasive body-movement. The instructors did not teach the defence as including an evasive body-movement, even though they would employ an evasive body-movement when performing the defence or kata.

All just FWIW.

I am not familiar with this initialism.

No comments:

Post a Comment