# Kuk Sool Won & Hapkido ?



## TKDJUDO

Are Hapkido And Kuk Sool Won similar? They both are hybrid martial arts and use the same Technical Aspects but what's different about them ?


----------



## arnisador

Yes, they're similar at the base, but KSW has a much wider variety of techniques, esp. with respect to weaponry.


----------



## matt.m

I am afraid to touch the subject so please no flaming me after.  However, as I understand.....Won, Kwang Wha.....Ji, Han Jae....GGM Lee H. Park, Dad, or GM Hildebrand have never ever said that hapkido is a hybrid art.

It is a certain set of techniques, the are son mok soo, eui bok soo, kibbon soo, cane, knife defense, modified throwing and a bit of ground work. Combinations and a strong push to kicking.

Very very dynamic kicking.  Kuk Sool Won and Hwarg-Do are arts as well.  I train with a J.R. West Black Belt that comes to our school on Thursday.  He has a set cirriculum from white to dan.  He is now learning Moo Sul Kwan.  It is all good.  However, I believe that "Hybrid Hapkido." if you will is totally non existent.  I mean, isn't there already one Jeet Kune Do?

Hapkido was never designed to be a hybrid art.  Choi taught 11 students differently for different reasons.  For example: Won, Kwang Wha was Suh, Bok Subs father's bodyguard.  Suh, Bok Sub's dad was a congressman in South Korea.  So Moo Sul Kwan hapkido is very dynamic, graceful, but direct winning techniques.  

Just my .02


----------



## Drac

Good post Matt...I never thought that Hapkido was a hybrid art...


----------



## howard

Hi,

IMO, almost all Hapkido taught today is a hybrid art. Here's why I believe that.

Almost all of the Hapkido schools around can trace their lineage somehow back to Master Ji Han Jae. Master Ji and one of his contemporaries pretty much created modern Hapkido by adding the elaborate kicking techniques and the philosophical aspect of the art to Choi's Aikijujutsu base.

If you search out one of the kwans that has restricted itself to what Choi taught, you'll see a big difference... the most obvious being no high kicks, a much greater emphasis on what the Daito-ryu people call _aiki_, and essentially no philosophy other than just live right (we should recall that Choi learned a "Jutsu", not a "Do", while he was in Japan). Not only that, the higher-level locking, throwing and pinning techniques are more subtle than what you might find in other more modern Hapkido systems.

Choi's art was more narrowly focused in certain respects than modern Hapkido - restricted to what he called _Yawara_. But don't let that deceive you. His art was a comprehensive, elaborate and very effective system.

Just my opinion, of course, based on my experience. :asian:


----------



## matt.m

Howard, if you look at the root of what we both said we agreed totally.  We just used different people as examples of base.  See, Choi didn't want just one direct cirriculum.  That is why J.R. West hapkido is different than Moo Sul Kwan.  Sin Moo Hapkido and Jin Pal are different in cirriculum.  I however believe that you miss the point of hybrid, or maybe I am.  See I look at Hybrid as "Make it up as you go to suit you."  That is not a set cirriculum.  However, at it's core there may be a base cirriculum.  However, when changed you disrepect the GGM who founded the system.  For example, Moo Sul Kwan Hapkido has not been changed from the way Lee taught Dad and GM Hildebrand.  Period.  There is none of this, "I like the technique better this way than that. etc."  It has been a set system built upon many reps and taught to those of us learning the system.

Put simply, hybrid is not a system.




howard said:


> Hi,
> 
> IMO, almost all Hapkido taught today is a hybrid art. Here's why I believe that.
> 
> Almost all of the Hapkido schools around can trace their lineage somehow back to Master Ji Han Jae. Master Ji and one of his contemporaries pretty much created modern Hapkido by adding the elaborate kicking techniques and the philosophical aspect of the art to Choi's Aikijujutsu base.
> 
> If you search out one of the kwans that has restricted itself to what Choi taught, you'll see a big difference... the most obvious being no high kicks, a much greater emphasis on what the Daito-ryu people call _aiki_, and essentially no philosophy other than just live right (we should recall that Choi learned a "Jutsu", not a "Do", while he was in Japan). Not only that, the higher-level locking, throwing and pinning techniques are more subtle than what you might find in other more modern Hapkido systems.
> 
> Choi's art was more narrowly focused in certain respects than modern Hapkido - restricted to what he called _Yawara_. But don't let that deceive you. His art was a comprehensive, elaborate and very effective system.
> 
> Just my opinion, of course, based on my experience. :asian:


----------



## Dusty

If you go back far enough, you will find that kuk sool won was originally called kuk sool hapkido, even though In Hyuk Suh will deny this. my understanding of it was that he wanted to distance himself from the hapkido community, so he changed it to kuk sool won. My instructor's certificates for 1st, 2nd and 3rd dahn back in the 60's was issued in kuk sool hapkido signed by In Hyuk Suh, co signed by In Sun Seo (his brother, now the head of the Kido Hae). My Instructor spent many years in the wksa before leaving near the end of the 90's. my ranking with him is in kong shin bup hapkido and kuk sool hapkido.
take it for what you will.:asian:

Dusty, kj


----------



## howard

matt.m said:


> ...I look at Hybrid as "Make it up as you go to suit you."  That is not a set cirriculum.


Hi Matt,

We probably agree, but are just getting bogged down in semantics.

See, I come from an unusual style of Hapkido in that our headmaster trained directly under Choi and never altered what he learned. So, we don't have any of the elaborate kicking techniques that Master Ji and other(s) added to Choi's base, and we don't have any significant meditation/philosophy. What we have basically is the aikijujutsu base that Choi learned in Japan, whatever that was. That means that our curriculum in certain respects is narrower than those of most Hapkidoin.

I think of a "hybrid" art as one with more than one influence. So, in the case of modern Hapkido, there is the influence of Choi's aikijujutsu base, and there is the influence of the kicks, etc. that Master Ji added.

Hope this clarifies a bit what I was trying to convey... take care.


----------



## Brad Dunne

OK, I'll be the fly in the ointment......... If Choi "didn't want just one direct cirriculum", then we have what can be conceived as a quasi-hybrid discipline,(Choi taught 11 students differently for different reasons). So one can assume that 11 different students, being taught differntly, (just how different is another question) and surely they inturn added or incorporated something from any prior training so again nothing is what one would call "pure", so why would it not be considered "hybrid". There is a basic core or premise that is Hapkido and IMO that is the use of joint locks, takedowns and throws. How one arrives at these elements is the basis for the different venues of what we consider Hapkido. So in review, Hybrid seems to be a fitting label.


----------



## howard

Brad Dunne said:


> (Choi taught 11 students differently for different reasons). So one can assume that 11 different students, being taught differntly...


Could you elaborate on that?

What 11 students are you talking about?


----------



## terryl965

I guess in today terminologies it could be consider a hybrid since it has taken from a couple other Arts. But believe Matt and Howard are together as well with what they are saying just in a different manner.


----------



## Brad Dunne

,(Choi taught 11 students differently for different reasons). So one can assume that 11 different students, being taught differntly,

Could you elaborate on that?

What 11 students are you talking about?


Just using the info in the post that Matt made. I've heard this statement before so I'm just offering credence to it's validity.


----------



## matt.m

I know that Kwang Sik Myung, Ji Han Jae, and Won, Kwang Wha learned directly from Choi as did Suh-Bok Sub.  I know that is only four, I believe that Bong Soo Han and the GGM of Jung Ki were also part of the first 11 students.

However, Dad and GM Hildebrand who learned directly from GM Park mentioned on several occasions that Park said the following "Won, Kwang Wha told me that Choi taught the original 11 a little differently on purpose.  He did not want any one certain codified set of techniques."  "If he did then it would take a life time to make 1st dan considering he had 3808 techniques at his disposal."

Just imagine having to learn all 3808.  Now do you see the reason, plus not all techiques work for everyone etc.  Won, Kwang-Wha was a body guard for Suh-Bok Sub's dad, who happened to be a congressman in South Korea at the time.  That is why Moo Sul Kwan Hapkido is quick, graceful, yet extremely painful and deadly. Choi taught him that way for arresting and killing techniques against multiple attackers while defending someone else.


----------



## iron_ox

matt.m said:


> I know that Kwang Sik Myung, Ji Han Jae, and Won, Kwang Wha learned directly from Choi as did Suh-Bok Sub.  I know that is only four, I believe that Bong Soo Han and the GGM of Jung Ki were also part of the first 11 students.
> 
> However, Dad and GM Hildebrand who learned directly from GM Park mentioned on several occasions that Park said the following "Won, Kwang Wha told me that Choi taught the original 11 a little differently on purpose.  He did not want any one certain codified set of techniques."  "If he did then it would take a life time to make 1st dan considering he had 3808 techniques at his disposal."
> 
> Just imagine having to learn all 3808.  Now do you see the reason, plus not all techiques work for everyone etc.  Won, Kwang-Wha was a body guard for Suh-Bok Sub's dad, who happened to be a congressman in South Korea at the time.  That is why Moo Sul Kwan Hapkido is quick, graceful, yet extremely painful and deadly. Choi taught him that way for arresting and killing techniques against multiple attackers while defending someone else.



Hello all,

Matt, please don't take this the wrong way, but the information you posted is somewhat inaccurate.

Suh Bok Sub was Choi Dojunim's first student.  Ji Han Jae was also a direct student, stating in 1949 - so, not one of the first 11 (although I have no idea why this number has any relevance).  Kwang Sik Myung was a student of Ji Han Jae, and only a seminar student of Choi Dojunim; as Myung never lived in Daegu.  Similarly, Bong Soo Han was a student of Ji, and perhaps a seminar student of Choi Dojunim, but never a direct student.

Won Kwang Wha was a student of Suh Bok Sub first, so he alos did not fall into this early roster category.

Grandmaster Lim, of the Jungki Kwan started training under Choi Dojunim in 1965, so he certainly did not fall into the "first 11 category".

Having had the opportunity to train with students that started training with  Choi Dojunim in 1949, even predating Ji's arrival, I can tell you that they report that Choi Dojunim taught virtually the same techniques to everyone.  He taught about 100 techniques to cho dan - these were the basics from which the rest of the 3806 were derived.  The problem really existed that most of Choi Dojunim's students did not stay around long enough to learn the advanced material - remember, only 4 men ever received a 9th Dan from Choi Dojunim.

These men were, in order, Chang, Chin Il, Lim Hyun Soo, Kim Yun Sang, GM Lee (Kim Yun Sang's training partner, now deceased).

Most of the men that trained with Choi Dojunim never received 4th Dans, let alone higher rank.

I am not sure where the information about the first 11 students comes from, but I feel that that the notion that they were taught different material because Choi Dojunim did not want to codify his techniques does not bear up under the scrutiny of the evidence that many of the men that did train with Choi Dojunim in these early days are teaching the same material taught by those who came, and stayed to learn later.

It is also important to remember that Choi Dojunim was illiterate - he therefore taught from his head, not notes, as  his students from a variety of different start decades report that he taught the same material, the codification was apparently in his head.

I have never found a technique that did not work for everyone, it depends how it is taught.  As far as the number of actual techniques learned from Choi Dojunim, Grandmaster Lim claims some 2900 in his repetoire, after some 22 years of study, 9 in private lessons - so learning the full 3806 might be hard, but it is something to shoot for...


----------



## matt.m

Kevin,

I can go with most of what you are saying.  Suh-Bok Sub is Indeed Choi's 1st student.  Suh has stated that in many interviews etc.  However, I know as an actual fact that Choi directly taught Won, Kwang-Wha.  Suh, Bok Sub was more or less the assisstant instructor.  Ji Han Jae and Won, Kwang Wha were more or less classmates, for better terminology.

I know this because Won, Kwang Wha was Suh, Bok Subs father's body guard who was a congressman in S. Korea.  Won, Kwang Wha learned what Won, Kwang Wha called Moo Sool Kwan hapkido.  Lee H. Park and his brother lived with Won, Kwang Wha and was told this story several times for re confirmation.

When Lee came to Cape Girardeau, MO he passed along this information to GM Charles Hildebrand and my pop, when he founded Moo Sul Kwan.  I had known Lee from 1978 till his death in 1988 and he would rather have been beaten by cane than to tell a lie or untruth.  So, the rest of your argument I cannot really comment on except for Ji, Han Jae and Kwang Sik Myung.  Kwang did indeed learn from Choi.  If you look at his 2 books on hapkido they show the absolute closest techniques that Moo Sul Kwan Hapkido could have, cirriculum wise.


----------



## iron_ox

Matt,

Won Kwang Wha may have indeed spend some time with Choi Dojunim,  but you will admit, he was not one of the first 11 students.

As far as Kwang Sik Myung, sorry, you are incorrect.  Myung was not from Daegu, he therefore was not a direct student of Choi Dojunim.  Any similarity in technique came from his early training with Ji Han Jae, when Ji was still teaching at his Sung Moo Kwan,  and not Sin Moo (after his incarceration and all the additions he made.)  It is possible that Myung did some seminar work with Choi Dojunim when he traveled to Seoul, which we know Choi Dojunim did from time to time.

As far as curriculum, I have no idea of Moo Sul Kwan, but Myung's works (books) are far more indicitive of Ji, eg high kicks, flying kicks, large circular motions,etc - none of which are indicative of Choi Dojunim's techniques.


----------



## bdparsons

Dusty said:


> If you go back far enough, you will find that kuk sool won was originally called kuk sool hapkido, even though In Hyuk Suh will deny this. my understanding of it was that he wanted to distance himself from the hapkido community, so he changed it to kuk sool won.Dusty, kj


 
This is an accurate statement. Hwrangdo followed much the same path. Their "founders" were solidly Hapkido before they chose to make a name for themselves.

Respects,
Bill Parsons
Triangle Kenpo Institute


----------



## Dusty

another perspective. fwiw.

http://www.hwarang.org/Contemporary.html

Dusty, kj


----------



## matt.m

iron_ox said:


> Matt,
> Won Kwang Wha may have indeed spend some time with Choi Dojunim, but you will admit, he was not one of the first 11 students.


Sorry Kevin, you are dead wrong.  In He-Young Kimm's Hapkido Bible #I he states the following. I will paraphrase just for the sake of argument but here it goes.

"Choi gets attacked outside the brewery, and wins.  Suh-Bok Sub was the  brewery owner.  He was a 2nd dan in Yudo, anyway he was bested by Choi."

Suh-Bok Sub set Choi up to begin teaching.  Won-Kwang Wha was Suh, Bok Sub's father's bodyguard.  Sub's father was a Congressman.  So his teachings came from Choi."  

Most will agree that He-Young Kimm is a very outstanding historian, concerning the Korean Martial Arts, if not the expert.  He and Lee H. Park were at one time great friends.  So why would Won, Kwang Wha He-Young Kimm or Lee H. Park lie?

That just seems ridiculous and laughable to me.  Not only that but you know I find this to be one of the tit for tat in fighting on why hapkido does not grow in more of a unity.  All of this bickering.  I have provided substantial evidence and you tell me I have to agree with you.  Kevin, I call this nonsense.


----------

