# An interesting problem with TSD hyung...



## Makalakumu (Aug 18, 2006)

Over the years, our forms have been changed.  In some cases slightly and in some cases in very major ways.  

This is a problem.  

Undoubtedly, techniques in many forms have been changed by people who had absolutely no idea what they were changing.  Valuable fighting information was lost because of this.  It'd be like taking a book on fighting that included all of the written information you needed to begin to practice some effective techniques and then tearing pages out.  And then you add pages that are essentially meaningless to the context.  All of the TSD hyung have undergone this process.  

A good example of this would be the hyung Rohai.  The TSD version is clearly inspired by the Matsumura Rohai, but so much of it has been changed for whatever reason, it is very difficult to delve into what the original intent and applications may have been.

How do you deal with this problem...if at all?


----------



## Makalakumu (Aug 18, 2006)

Here are some things that I have thought about that may address this problem...

1.  Stop practicing forms.  If somebody decided to stop practicing the forms in their art because they have been changed so much by people who had no knowledge of what was originally in the form, I wouldn't even attempt to argue against that logic.  Any other approach is going to take alot more time and if you want to learn how to fight RIGHT NOW you may not have the time to do that.

2.  Create your own forms.  If you understand the true purpose of a hyung, you can create your own forms based on your philosophical approach to fighting and what you know about fighting.  The form is going to represent your experience with fighting...and hopefully, you have enough practical knowledge in self defense to create something that is effective.

3.  Become an archeaologist.  Research the lineage of your forms and take it back as far as you can.  Find people who still practice the original versions of your hyungs and see what they do.  Learn that stuff.  Test it.  Learn which parts of your forms still show that stuff.  Practice that stuff.  The entire form may not be useful to you, but certain parts of it will certainly have value.

4.  Become an anachronist.  Research the lineage of your forms and take it back as far as you can.  Learn the original version of the form and learn the applications.  Slowly begin to revert back to that older, more effective, version.  

5.  Innovate.  View the form that you learned as an inkblot.  Create your own interpretations for the movements in the hyung.  Test those interpretations in a resistive environment.  Create an entirely new understanding of that form and its techniques.


----------



## EmperorOfKentukki (Aug 19, 2006)

I like that.


----------



## Kacey (Aug 19, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> Here are some things that I have thought about that may address this problem...
> 
> 1.  Stop practicing forms.  If somebody decided to stop practicing the forms in their art because they have been changed so much by people who had no knowledge of what was originally in the form, I wouldn't even attempt to argue against that logic.  Any other approach is going to take alot more time and if you want to learn how to fight RIGHT NOW you may not have the time to do that.
> 
> ...



My instructor does this for himself, and encourages the rest of us to join him in finding out this type of information, to improve ourselves and the art as a whole.  Great advice, thanks!


----------



## mjd (Aug 27, 2006)

I think there is more to this question, was it lost because people have changed it or because they were never given it.

I would say yes, but why, what were the reason for the changing and the many difference in TSD hyungs from one linage to another.

Here is some reasons, I am sure their are many others.
1. commercialism
2. individualism
3. interpretation
4. separatism

In the old days, Masters would always hold back some of their knowledge from the student to remain superior, this was often taken to their graves and lost forever, this creates a slow erosion of the complete knowledge and understanding, this is true with cultures who fear giving all their knowledge to foreigners or other cultures.

Some Masters did not live to a ripe old age and again taking their knowledge and understanding to the grave never sharing it all.

He who does not know will make up his own understanding.

what do you think?


----------



## Fuzzy Foot (Aug 29, 2006)

This does seem to be a source of frustration in some schools and styles. When my instructor would adopt a different version of a form or modify a move, here's my take. First being one of the senior students he would explain the change and why and where he got it from, which helped. Not to be degrading, but the lower ranks were expected to do as they were told. We didn't worry about being PC or offending anyone back then. Because the school would now be practicing the form this way I would also out of respect for my instructor and because I felt he had the knowledge and years (25+ years at the time) to make such decisions. In fact when I had as many years and "sufficient rank" he encouraged me to make my own adaptations as I saw fit as well as teaching applications. In some cases I would continue to practice a form both ways, the original way I was taught (because I liked the moves better) and the change, the way the school currently adopted. I realize that this may be too much or too confusing for below BB level, but for students of higher rank and experience it should not be much of a problem if the understanding is there. There is another issue, that the old masters who developed the art and the forms were not perfect, nor were the forms, AND I think they would be disappointed if we were not developing and refining their work and increasing our understanding. However, IMO any "official changes" in forms and technique should be done by either panels of qualified individuals overseeing the style/school or if a school is unaffiliated by legitimate instructors no lower than master level of their style, with a minimum of 25 years' training. I have great respect and admiration for the early masters of the arts, but I also feel we have with us today some outstanding qualified and knowledgeable teachers (along with the pretenders and wannabees) that if they made a decision to change a form, I would gladly try to embace it and understand it.


----------



## Master Jay S. Penfil (Aug 30, 2006)

One thing that should be understood is that: every grandmaster that ever developed a series of hyung/kata and established his own school/Kwan/Ryu, etc., started out as a white-belt (or beginner where no belt system was in place), and then trained over his lifetime in one or more systems until he established what HE felt was the best Way for him, and for his students.

Understanding that the martial arts are A Living Art, or a Work-In Progress, it would be wrong to learn something, have in your mind a way to improve on what you had been taught, and then Say Nothing

It IS necessary to have established a high level of understanding prior to making changes or adaptations, but, as Hwang Kee discussed in his book, Tang Soo Do-Soo Bahk Do; Rue-Pah is the natural order of the flow in nature. It would be impossible to teach the same techniques to many students of different backgrounds, sizes, levels of education, levels of flexibility (both Mental and Physical), etc. and expect there to NOT be differences in the way that their individual students teach and perform as the generations come and go.

It is natural to expect each instructor that has a hand in passing along the knowledge to add his/her own flavor to the mix. If you have an instructor that is unable to discuss or demonstrate what they teach in any other context other then what they were taught, all that you have is a Parrot. 

As an instructor, I look for ones ability to open his/her mind up to what they see and experience, and then come back to me and show me what THEY see I have one student who has spent the past couple of years in Afghanistan and Iraq with our military. When he came in on leave last March I had his teach a seminar on, what he called; Field Applications of Kicho Hyung Il Bu. While he was in the field, fighting for his life, and ours, he was dissecting the hyung I had taught him and digging out New ways to utilize the techniques. What he came up with was quite impressive.

If I had the mind-set of some of the heads of the Main-Stream organizations, with a curriculum to Protect, I might have been upset with him for showing something that I dont teach Such is not the case in my school. I encourage students to find their own way as they grow in their training. We do have a basic structure that everyone starts with, but as students attain each new rank level we add additional levels of Bunkai, Henka and Oyo to their foundation

This is what I call; learning a SYSTEM.



Your thoughts

Yours in Tang Soo Do,


Master Jay S. Penfil



TANG SOO!!!


----------



## Chizikunbo (Sep 3, 2006)

Upnorthkyosa,
there are not set interpretations of forms. There are tons and tons of versions of the forms even in the Ryukyu arts. Itosu created in pinan kata lets say 100 years ago...look at how many variations of this hyung there are, not just in Tang Soo Do, but in Shuri systems...Ryukyu Kempo, Shotokan, Matsubayashi, etc. etc. There is no way to revert back to the original forms. Finding the original intent of the form is an even more daunting task. Just train, train, and train, and based on your experience, and philisophical take on the arts the meaning of the forms will come to you...I always liked the quite by Taika Oyata "There is no wasted movement in Kata, and for every movement there is at least 1000 true applications". Just try to have an open mind and heart...Eventually the meanings of the forms will become your own...
--josh


----------

