# Taijutsu and Ed Parker Kenpo



## Kenpoist (Mar 25, 2005)

I study Kenpo Taijutsu (primary art of EPAK/ secondary Budo Taijutsu), but we don't get into much of the Taijutsu cirricullum until kenpo black belt level.  My instructor received his 2nd Black from Hatsumi Sensei several years ago.  

Can you current practioners of the art tell me the format of training - structure/weapontry/unarmed principles that I might look forward to in the future.  My instructor tells me that my kenpo training will complement the Taijutsu. 

Thanks -


----------



## Grey Eyed Bandit (Mar 25, 2005)

I attend the occasional FMA or Silat seminar every once in a while, but that I do for the sake of my own personal interest and enjoyment. I'd probably put out a word of caution to those who feel that their Bujinkan training needs to be complemented because of certain things lacking.Trying to describe what Bujinkan training is like could take some time, to say the least.:asian:


----------



## Shogun (Mar 25, 2005)

Basically, in the bujinkan, you get what you want. mostly.


----------



## Grey Eyed Bandit (Mar 25, 2005)

I don't know about all I want, but I do get everything I need.:ultracool


----------



## Don Roley (Mar 26, 2005)

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> I study Kenpo Taijutsu (primary art of EPAK/ secondary Budo Taijutsu), but we don't get into much of the Taijutsu cirricullum until kenpo black belt level.  My instructor received his 2nd Black from Hatsumi Sensei several years ago.
> 
> Can you current practioners of the art tell me the format of training - structure/weapontry/unarmed principles that I might look forward to in the future.  My instructor tells me that my kenpo training will complement the Taijutsu.
> 
> Thanks -



I doubt you will learn Bujinkan. More like Bujinkan flavored kenpo. It sounds like your teacher's main experience is with kenpo, and second dan is not really all that impressive a rank in the Bujinkan. Many students have habits from their old arts.

But I mainly say this because the Bujinkan I train in here in Japan puts a great importance on things like the san shin. These are very basic exercises to get you to move your body in certain ways. You should be learning them as soon as possible. If your teacher waits until black belt level, he probably is either unaware of them, or does not really move in a way that they push in Japan.

And as others have pointed out, in America there are so many ways of teaching the art that you can't really get a straight answer as to how it may be taught.

I am not saying that Bujinkan flavored kenpo is bad. But you just have to realize that what you may think is the same as what Hatsumi is doing is probably not.


----------



## Kenpoist (Mar 30, 2005)

Don> I won't be able to comment on the authenticity of the budo taijutsu training until I start the cirricullum and am later able to observe the movements of a practitioner whose primary art and focus is the Bujinkan arts.

I am and will always be a kenpoist at the core, but I look forward to someday learning some of the principles of the Bujinkan system. 

As stated previously, my instructor received his 2nd Dan directly from Hatsumi Sensei, so Hatsumi Sensei must have seen something that prompted the recognition of a higher rank (i.e. - my instructor's previous knowledge of kenpo and other arts were a good foundation for his study and training in the Bujinkan arts.) It didn't take my instructor too long to achieve the rank of 2nd Dan.


----------



## Don Roley (Mar 30, 2005)

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> As stated previously, my instructor received his 2nd Dan directly from Hatsumi Sensei, so Hatsumi Sensei must have seen something that prompted the recognition of a higher rank (i.e. - my instructor's previous knowledge of kenpo and other arts were a good foundation for his study and training in the Bujinkan arts.) It didn't take my instructor too long to achieve the rank of 2nd Dan.



I think you should understand something about the ecentric way Hatsumi gives out rank. He _frequently_ gives out rank long before a person is ready for it. It is kind of a way to let people grow into the rank. Or at least that is what he says. An unspoken reason is that it also serves as a test for charecter and has been likened to giving a person enough rope to hang themselves with.

Let us take two examples of people that show up to train with Hatsumi but are not very skilled or knowledgeable. They both seem eager despite the fact they don't know their left from their right. Hatsumi suddenly gives them both second or third dan rankings.

The first guys says to himself, "There is no way I am deserving of this! I better go out and get better." He then starts going to every class he can with people more experienced than him and begs those that can help him to point out his mistakes and show him what he is weak in.

The second guy says, "I'm so fantastic! If I got this far in this short a time I guess I really don't need any more instruction!" He then adds the rank to his resume, stops all but token ties to the Bujinkan and struts around content.

In the first case Hatsumi has found a worthy student and encouraged him to train harder. And in the second the guy probably will not be back to take up the time that Hatsumi could be spending on the more worthy student.

Read some of the past threads in this section and you will find that most worthy people in the Bujinkan do not take their rank very seriously. Try to find one really experienced person in the art that will say that rank is a indication of skill. You may be used to one way of thiking about rank, Hatsumi does things his own way.


----------



## Kenpoist (Mar 31, 2005)

Don Roley said:
			
		

> Let us take two examples of people that show up to train with Hatsumi but are not very skilled or knowledgeable. They both seem eager despite the fact they don't know their left from their right. Hatsumi suddenly gives them both second or third dan rankings.
> The first guys says to himself, "There is no way I am deserving of this! I better go out and get better." He then starts going to every class he can with people more experienced than him and begs those that can help him to point out his mistakes and show him what he is weak in
> The second guy says, "I'm so fantastic! If I got this far in this short a time I guess I really don't need any more instruction!" He then adds the rank to his resume, stops all but token ties to the Bujinkan and struts around content.
> 
> ...


----------



## Don Roley (Apr 1, 2005)

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> If you are impying he is the "second guy"



Why are you assuming that?

You stated as a fact that since your instructor achieved second dan in a short time that the basics of kenpo and taijutsu _must_ be similar. I gave the worst example of how that is a wrong assumption and you now seem to be getting rather defensive about the matter. For my example to be vaild, your teacher would have to have stopped trying to get better in the Bujinkan, has not come to Japan since getting his rank, doesn't go to seminars by high ranking members, etc in order to get good. You did not say one way or the other if he had cut off all ties like that and merely rested on his rank.

But I must say this. I think I have had a bit more experience in the Bujinkan than you or your teacher. I also have had a bit of exposure to the type of Kenpo taught by Ed Parker through a friend I call "Pancho." I respect Pancho's abilities very much. He has gone through a lot of hell and his ability to rumble is greater than my meager abilities. But I can tell that there are some very fundemental differences between the strategies and applications he uses and what I see being taught in the Bujinkan here in Japan. I think you should keep that in mind and empty your cup when approaching the subject of learning Bujinkan taijutsu.


----------



## Kenpoist (Apr 1, 2005)

I don't know whether there are similiar principles to both arts or not at this point since I don't have much exposure to Bujinkan. The reason my instructor chooses to teach Kenpo as the base art rather than Bujinkan is based on our systems practical applications on the street. Not to say Bujinkan is not practical, but Kenpo was formed as a pure self defense based art thus it is my instructor's main focus.

I don't feel as though I'm being defensive anymore than your tone might be construed as being that of keeping the "secret" art of bujinkan out of the hands of us non-practitioners. I merely started my inquiry in this forum to get a little insight into the Bujinkan system and the progression/technique/principles that are taught. I have to say my question was not answered and I will have to discover it for myself when my instructor decides to make it part of my training.


----------



## Grey Eyed Bandit (Apr 1, 2005)

I've heard that Bob Orlando is guilty of the same error - trying to make kali and kuntaosilat fit into the movement pattern of kenpo, with questionable results.
There really is no good way to describe Bujinkan training principles to someone unfamiliar with the methods used.

The Bujinkan ryuha were first and foremost designed to be combat systems, not self defense systems. That is true.


----------



## Cryozombie (Apr 1, 2005)

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> The reason my instructor chooses to teach Kenpo as the base art rather than Bujinkan is based on our systems practical applications on the street. Not to say Bujinkan is not practical, but Kenpo was formed as a pure self defense based art thus it is my instructor's main focus.


Well, The techniques in the 'Kan were developed on the battlefield, and refined out of techniques from people who survived the battle using them... so i would suppose that it was formed as a pure self defense as well...


----------



## MisterMike (Apr 1, 2005)

Don Roley said:
			
		

> But I must say this. I think I have had a bit more experience in the Bujinkan than you or your teacher. I also have had a bit of exposure to the type of Kenpo taught by Ed Parker through a friend I call "Pancho." I respect Pancho's abilities very much. He has gone through a lot of hell and his ability to rumble is greater than my meager abilities. But I can tell that *there are some very fundemental differences between the strategies and applications * he uses and what I see being taught in the Bujinkan here in Japan. I think you should keep that in mind and empty your cup when approaching the subject of learning Bujinkan taijutsu.



This is true. 10+ yrs of Parker Kenpo here and <1 in the Buj. I feel like I am starting over. One thing about having gone through the entire Parker system is that you can look at the Buj tai jutsu techniques and go, "oh yea, that's just like this technique from Kenpo done a bit different" so memorizing the Buj techniques may come a bit quicker than someone with no experience.

Of course the ideology is much different and Kenpo does not have as much for weapons training or throws. Generally the Kenpoist will state their empty hand principles can be applied to the use of weapons but this will vary greatly from school to school.

In the end, it think it would be very difficult to teach/learn both at once.


----------



## Don Roley (Apr 8, 2005)

MisterMike said:
			
		

> One thing about having gone through the entire Parker system is that you can look at the Buj tai jutsu techniques and go, "oh yea, that's just like this technique from Kenpo done a bit different" so memorizing the Buj techniques may come a bit quicker than someone with no experience.



The big possible problem with this is that some people that only spend a little amount of time in one of the arts or are not very observent may look at similar movements and not notice the very important but subtle differences.

I can't count the number of times I have heard stories of people trying to do a new system according to the principles of their old one with bad results. Last summer I learned a knife form from a Indonesian stylist and did it as close to what he showed as possible. As I was practicing it in his back yard he looked up from his "fruit juice" at me and grinned. "Very Japanese" is what he said. Siiiiiigh! Back to trying to get it down to the way he showed it rather than the way I think he did it according to the habits I have built up over the years.


----------



## Grey Eyed Bandit (Apr 8, 2005)

On the other hand, I've seen Chas Clemens write somewhere that he thinks the Bujinkan practitioners he has seen move like Minangkabau silat stylists...


----------



## davidg553 (Apr 9, 2005)

Don Roley said:
			
		

> The big possible problem with this is that some people that only spend a little amount of time in one of the arts or are not very observent may look at similar movements and not notice the very important but subtle differences.


  Hopefully these people have good teachers


----------



## r erman (Apr 9, 2005)

> I can't count the number of times I have heard stories of people trying to do a new system according to the principles of their old one with bad results. Last summer I learned a knife form from a Indonesian stylist and did it as close to what he showed as possible. As I was practicing it in his back yard he looked up from his "fruit juice" at me and grinned. "Very Japanese" is what he said. Siiiiiigh! Back to trying to get it down to the way he showed it rather than the way I think he did it according to the habits I have built up over the years.



It also depends on your reason for learning something new.  There is nothing wrong with adapting new ideas to your way of movement--unless you are trying to learn that system itlself.


----------



## Don Roley (Apr 9, 2005)

I have split the thread off from former topic due to the differences in the subject.



> It also depends on your reason for learning something new. There is nothing wrong with adapting new ideas to your way of movement--unless you are trying to learn that system itlself.



Well, for me I would have to at least try to learn the system as it was supposed to be done before I consciously tried to modify somethign for my taijutsu base.

I have learned through some bitter experiences that some of what I thought were small differences were actually very signifigent. And the opposite is also true. I believe that until I know the art to a level of mastery that I probably will not know which is which. That means I reach the "Ri" part of the "Shu- Ha- Ri" process. And the first part, "Shu", requires that you learn the movements _exactly_ as shown to fill the term "preserve."

I tend to take a lot of frauds and thirty- something "grandmasters" of their new, improved styles to task because they fill the description of a pirate in this article so well. So, if I don't make the effort to learn something totally before trying to add it onto what I do, what kind of hypocrite would I be?


----------



## r erman (Apr 9, 2005)

Don,

I see where you are coming from.  But when you have systems that have different operating systems and levels of sophistication it might be detrimental to try to learn a different system.  I know I've seen things in many different systems that are *simlar* to what I do--sometimes working with a stylist from another art has shown me things I didn't realize were in my own.  That doesn't mean I'm gonna jump systems or perhaps confuse how I've conditioned myself to respond to aggression by trying to master that art...


----------



## MisterMike (Apr 11, 2005)

Don Roley said:
			
		

> The big possible problem with this is that some people that only spend a little amount of time in one of the arts or are not very observent may look at similar movements and not notice the very important but subtle differences.
> 
> I can't count the number of times I have heard stories of people trying to do a new system according to the principles of their old one with bad results. Last summer I learned a knife form from a Indonesian stylist and did it as close to what he showed as possible. As I was practicing it in his back yard he looked up from his "fruit juice" at me and grinned. "Very Japanese" is what he said. Siiiiiigh! Back to trying to get it down to the way he showed it rather than the way I think he did it according to the habits I have built up over the years.



Yea, I was talking more on a basic level of "left foot here, right foot there, grab and throw" sort of thing. The subtlties would certainly come from my new teacher rather than my trying to pick them up visually. There is a lot more "feeling" required to understand tai jutsu than in Parker Kenpo. And this you canot always see.


----------



## Goldendragon7 (Apr 11, 2005)

Kenpoist said:
			
		

> My instructor tells me that my Kenpo training will complement the Taijutsu.
> Thanks -


   I believe your instructor is correct.  Kenpo can  complement any martial art.  It's base is in the logical study of motion and  mechanics from a pragmatic point of view. 

 :asian:


----------



## Grey Eyed Bandit (Apr 11, 2005)

The question is, are you sure you're not trying to fix something that isn't broken?


----------



## Don Roley (Apr 12, 2005)

Goldendragon7 said:
			
		

> I believe your instructor is correct.  Kenpo can  complement any martial art.  It's base is in the logical study of motion and  mechanics from a pragmatic point of view.



I used to make statements like that. But experience has taught me the fact that using wide ranging generalizations such as "any martial art" should not be used.

Nothing can be everything. There are limits on what we can do and what things can be. To do extremely well in one area you usually have to sacrifice other areas.

There is nothing _wrong_ in either a Ferrari or an 18 wheeler truck. Both do the jobs they were designed for very, very well. But it _is_ wrong to try to put the engine of the 18 wheeler into the Ferrari. If you try to get the performance of the Ferrari with the carry load of the truck you will end up with some sort of Frankenstein's monster that does neither very well. Even just the wheels, despite the fact they are both round and black, cannot be shared between the two without changing the entire set up of the vehicle and it's purpose.

And humans have been developing and systemizing ways of harming others for far longer than they have been building automobiles.

I have found that the habits I see being built up in one art are "wrong" in another art. Neither art is bad. But the way they approach the problem makes for a certain reality that they have to follow. Habits are built up and a good habit in one approach is a bad habit in another.

From what I see of Kenpo, there are some similarities. There are similarities in just about everything under the sun. But the Tao Te Ching says that they use of a wheel is in the part that is void and Dirty Harry said, "A man has to know his limitations." The differences are there and they are important. 

Without a good teacher and/or the experience to see the differences and the reasons for them, it is very easy to bring old habits into a new art and _think_ that you are doing well. In my youth I thought a punch was just a punch. But now I have come to see that there are great differences and the reasons for them in the ways different arts hit with a closed fist. And that differences in punching are only the tip of the iceburg.

Those that do not really have a core, do not know their own art and know little of other arts tend to fall into the trap of being the frog that sits at the bottom of a well and thinks it knows all about the great seas. I do not beleive that any art is the grand ultimate style and I have seen enough of the great wealth and diversity in all the martial arts out there to not make any broad generalizations.

In this case, I think that Mister Mike is the best placed to talk about the differences between the two arts. He seems to love them both and talks about the differences in the subtleties between them. I would advise we listen to him.


----------

