Differences between Kenpo and Kempo?

[Karazenpo]

Well, despite the spellings you find in various books, phonetically you will hear this word pronounced keMpo in Japanese every time, regardless of what any cheese-smelling whitebread like myself would say.

Yes, agreed. The research I have done also concluded it is always a phonetically pronounced 'm' even if spelled 'n'. To comment on Mr. Zarnett, I was told that the Japnese do not go by those translation dictionaries, they are for tourists or guys like us. I think John Bishop told me this but I'm not sure. If it was John, he should know, his mother is Japanese. Perhaps, he will comment. The Chow 'n' thing in Infinite Insights into Kenpo is inaccurate. Just re-read all the posts on this topic, it was Mitose who inadvertantly used the 'n' spelling. This one should be easy enough to verify. As a matter of fact from what I've learned Chow changed it from an 'n' to an 'm' in 1981. As matter of fact, I recall that personally because many followed suit back then, including one of my instructos, when it came out in all the martial art mags. In all due respect to Mr. Parker's books, like most martial arts books on the market, there are many historical inaccuracies due to misinformation, disinformation and/or bias. You just can't take everything you read as gospel no matter who wrote it and yes, I include myself, unless you check it out. When I post something I attempt to give some type of documentation and verification so that whoever reads it can check it out. I don't expect and shouldn't expect anyone to take it on face value just because I said it is so. Like in a police investigation, you need evidence, documentation and verfication in what you report or conclude, not blind faith because of who authored it. We have all been victim to 'misinformation' at one time or another in our carreers. If my memory is fuzzy on something and I can't recall or I'm not sure of my source, I will express that in the hopes someone out there can verify.

 

[Karazenpo]

Here's a theory I'd like to put forward for comment. Again, I am not stating this as fact, just an idea to throw around. This goes back to a previous post of lineage and why some do not include Mitose and also ties in Chow's father teaching him Kung Fu prior to training with Mitose. Documentation of what I'm about to say comes from an issue of, I believe, Black Belt magazine, however, if pressed for verification, I DO have the back issue and can go find it if neccessary. In this issue, Chow is quoted that Mitose taught him nothing, that he was a 'black belt' long before he ever met Mitose and that his father was his teacher. He goes on to call Mitose a 'con man' and so forth. Obviously this was long after their parting of the ways. Here's my point. Chow was a Mitose Balck Belt from the Official Self Defense Club period-a paper trail, as we say in police, leads right to Thomas Young and Mitose, not to mention pictures and Mitose's book where Chow was an uke. Now, the 'bad stuff' starts getting out about Mitose, not to mention the final blow with his incarceration for murder, kidnapping and extortion. Chow must take some heat, some real heat from the martial arts community due to his association with Mitose. Mitose's martial arts background later comes into question. Due to all the above, Chow decides to distance himself from Mitose and give his training a fresh new lineage. It was like, okay, so Mitose is a con man, his martial arts is in question, well, don't question me, I was already a black belt long before Mitose and I was trained by my father. However, when pressed for verfication, Chow has to state his training was from 'dreams'. (Don't shoot the messenger, I'm just referencing the articles). In my opinion, again opinion, I feel Chow was the first to do this and later, others followed suit. Something to think about anyway. Look at it this way, if this is correct, all the pieces fit together and it all makes sense. Unless of course, someone can legitmately verify Chow's father and/or grandfather and this whole kung fu thing that's been perpetuated for decades. I' don't think so. Please let me reitterate, this is in no disrepect to Chow and his system just attempting to find valid rationale of this fragmented and implausible history. Professor Chow was one of the great pioneers of modern Chinese Kenpo/Kempo and his contributions are deeply appreciated by the martial arts community. If my reasoning is true, I can understand why he did it. Mitose was and still is in the 'heat of controversy'. I kind of don't blame him!

 

[kelly keltner]

John

First and foremost make the phone call and quit dancing around the issue.
second the word kempo has been spelled with both an m and an n in various places and times in history. I quoted Bruce A. Haines book which was published in 1968 in a previous post. If you look in the footnotes section in the back much of the information he used came from interviews he did with Mitose around 19588-60. In that book Kosho Ryu Kempo is spelled with an M.
Thirdly I never called anyone, especially Thomas Young a liar. My personal opinion is that it problably didn't matter much to Mitose how Kempo was spelled. It problably didn't matter to Young either. Did you audio or video tape the interview you did with him? Bottom line is the certificate says what it says, and the fact remains that Thomas Young had an close eleven year relationship with Bruce Juchnik. Yes Paul Yamaguichi is a friend of mine, no I have not seen his certificate.
Bottom line is make the call man. If you need the number email me.

kelly

 

[kelly keltner]

I'll tell you what John. Let's put it to an informal poll. How many people in internet land, in the martialtalk corner of the universe think that John Bishop should communicate with Hanshi Bruce Juchnik and view Thomas Young's black belt certification? Let's rehash this so everyone is up to speed.

John Bishop states that the "Juchnik camp" has claimed to have a copy of Thomas Young's black belt certificate. On that certificate the"Juchnik camp" claims that kenpo is spelled with an M. Along comes yours truly Kelly Keltner. I Know Mr. Juchnik has this documentation and offer to facillitate a viewing for Mr. Bishop. Mr. Bishop Declines. He then goes on to state that kenpo has always been spelled with an N. I then cited a book that had info based on an interview back in the late 1950's in which Mitose not only refers to his art as Kosho Ryu, but also refers to kempo spelled with an M.

So now that everyone is up to speed. The question of the day. Should John Bishop call Hanshi Bruce Juchnik and arrange to see a copy of Thomas Young's certificate? All replies are welcome.

Yours in the arts

kelly

 

[kelly keltner]

OK...I don't believe that someone would have a Buddhist (Bukkyo) name of "Kenposaikosho"; I suppose it could happen, but I would like to see the proof at the Terra where that name would be registered.

Secondly, the Hepburn system has been around since the turn of the 20th century for romanizing the Japanese language. If he was educated in Japan, it certainly didn't sink in at all because the little rule that follows the "m" and "n" is obvious. As far as his English went, he seems to have been very capable of writing letters on his own and he had at least some mastery of the language. I would reason that he wanted to call it "kenpo" for his own reasons, and not because of being illiterate.

I don't know anything about a buddhist name having to be registered I do believe that was what he claimed his buddhist name to be on his buisness card. Whether he was telling the truth I cannot say.

kelly

 

[Mekosho]

Seems to me that if I was paying someone to investigate something for me, I would want that person to use ALL available resources...unless of course, I had my own hidden agenda that we refer to on here quite often, well then, maybe things would be different...Anyways...ya got my vote Kelly!!!

 

[Karazenpo]

Seems to me that if I was paying someone to investigate something for me, I would want that person to use ALL available resources...unless of course, I had my own hidden agenda that we refer to on here quite often, well then, maybe things would be different...Anyways...ya got my vote Kelly!!!

It appears to me, sir, you are off track in your response to Kelly. It is not John Bishop who is working on the A&E investigation of which your response implies. It is Professor Jaime Abregana and there is No hidden agenda on his part. I have also put Kelly in touch with Professor Abregana. If I may speak for the Professor (and I asked his permission) it doesn't matter to him one way or the other how this turns out. He has no vested interest in the Mitose saga, for or against. He is not of the Parker lineage who is negative on the Mitose claims or the Tracy people who are positive, nor is he Kosho ryu, as I stated before he's of the C.H.A. 3 Kenpo roots, a forerunner of Kajukenbo. As for John Bishop, I have found him to be open, honest and very helpful whenever I corresponded with him with any questions, whether by phone or through e-mail. My point is, if you have something to address to John, just e-mail him and I'm sure he will answer you.

 

[KempoJoe]

i think John Bishop hould get int touch with Hanshi Juchnik himself. Because it doesnt sound like anyone is getting anywhere. Ive met and train w/Hanshi and he would answer and questioned asked. thenk you

Joe
United Martial Art Academie
New Hampshire

 

[GAB]

To: The Kai:

Todd, when you are saying (btw regarding Rick Alemany) to whom are you addressing?

I don't think Professor Shuras, needs to apoligize for misinturpreting what you are saying, I am a little confused at the way, you have in addressing everyone and no one at the same time. Making statements as to his father and grandfather in a family way. Pretty confusing to say the least.

I do believe it has been alluded to more than several times in his own camp that ED Parker was the one who started the story about Professor Chow and his Father being a Kung Fu teacher. I have read it many times on various web sights.

I am not trying to have a problem with this thread but I see it starting to go south regarding the various statements, which should, maybe be held in private messages. I think it is a good post and don't want to see it locked up.

Regards, Gary

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Much ado about nothing?

I trained with a kenpo teacher for a good many years who, earlier in his life, set out on a search for "true" chinese kempo/kenpo. He had an 8th degree cert from Chow with celebratory snapshots...trained with some KJKB gentleman, but I know not whom; some Parker-breakaway boys, I know not whom; and finally took his quest to Japan, where he trained in Chinese Kenpo/Kempo (sp?) with a Japanese fellow for several years, obtaining a black belt ranking with some title, I know not what (combined his stuff from various locations with Judo & TKD, and..based on the repeatedly similar motions cropping up in MA's worldwide, called it "Universal Chinese Kenpo-Jujutsu"). Returned from his world-hopping mecca-seek with a couple of points regarding the history of kem/npo from Hawaii, for all of the downlines:

EVERYBODY IS WRONG, AND SHOULD JUST GET OVER IT, BECAUSE EVERYBODY (from the Hawaiian lines) IS DOING STUFF THAT IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE SOPHISTICATED THAN THE GUYS WITH PROPER PEDIGREES/LINEAGES IN JAPAN!!!

When on a few occasions I could get him to wax nostalgic and show me the Japanese version of Chinese Kenpo (weird, huh?), the moves were more like jujutsu entanglements and takedowns, with a bunch of atemi worked in during the engaging, entangling, and finishing (hit him often while dropping him to the floor with kote-gaeshi or katate-dori ich, then hit him some more when he's down). The strikes were NOT the rapid-fire semi-circular moves recognized as kem/npo-related here in the US, but rather singular, robotic strikes, or repeated robotic strikes (imagine three outward chops all in a row to one isolated target, to ensure broken bones).

So my question is this: If what we are doing is a better, next step in the evolution of percussion striking arts, who gives a big stinky poop about the pedigree? Few EPAK's today teach what Parker taught (largely, I ponder, because it went by too fast and they missed it); Parker did not teach what he was taught by Chow, who did not teach what he was taught by Mitose. So, ultimately, who cares?

Does what you do work?
Can you teach someone else how to do something that will work?

Most kem/npo folk I meet (from any camp) would have a hard time fighting their way out of a wet paper bag with a buck-knife...and that's a criticism coming from a guy for whom kenpo is a long-time fascination. Worry less about pieces of paper and spelling, and more about getting the job done.

Train hard, make lots of mistakes and learn from them, and bleed often in your endeavors. Otherwise, it's only dancing. And I don't WANT a combat pedigree from Fred Astaire.

Dr. Dave

 

[Karazenpo]

Dr. Dave, good points, I can't argue that and wouldn't because I agree. I have felt for years that the American versions of Kenpo/Kempo are much better tuned to modern day combat than the Japanese & Okinawan traditionalists. I was in one of those styles when I first started out (1973) and that is why I left, I viewed a modern Chinese kempo class and I was sold. I think most of us are quite aware of the effectiveness of the Americanized versions and their superiority over the older arts practiced in Japan and even here. The point of these posts, however, is about historical accuracy. I think most of us aren't arguing in defense of each other's art's effectiveness over the old but the perpetuating of myths that keeps getting handed down decade after decade from instructor to student. It's about time we got to the bottom of things because our history is an integral part of our art if we wish to be a well rounded martial artist. Gm. S. George Pesare has a saying about knowing one's history and lineage. It goes something like this: " You can't know where you're going to if you don't know where you came from". Well put I think. Students' will always ask these questions on lineage and history and it gets confusing when different instructors give different answers to the same damn questions. It makes us all look like asses. A student will also pick up on if you choose to skirt around the answer too. It's about time we all got on the same page but the only way to do that is through unbiased and factual investigations and the willingness to let go of the myths no matter how nice they may sound. Just my thoughts.

 

[BlackCatBonz]

to get back to the original question.........

What is the difference between kempo and kenpo?
absolutely nothing. Kempo is about study, nothing more, nothing less. The term itself has roots that go back 1000's of years. Try not to get caught up in minor things, Ken - the fist represents a scroll, which represents knowledge, Ho means law, or divine commandment. One tempers his actions with knowledge and understanding, to overcome that which blocks his path.
personal growth is the hallmark of the kempo man or woman.
Reliance on others for understanding blocks the gateway of one's own awakening

 

[Mekosho]

Guess I've been told...lol!

 

[Mekosho]

It appears to me, sir, you are off track in your response to Kelly. It is not John Bishop who is working on the A&E investigation of which your response implies. It is Professor Jaime Abregana and there is No hidden agenda on his part. I have also put Kelly in touch with Professor Abregana. If I may speak for the Professor (and I asked his permission) it doesn't matter to him one way or the other how this turns out. He has no vested interest in the Mitose saga, for or against. He is not of the Parker lineage who is negative on the Mitose claims or the Tracy people who are positive, nor is he Kosho ryu, as I stated before he's of the C.H.A. 3 Kenpo roots, a forerunner of Kajukenbo. As for John Bishop, I have found him to be open, honest and very helpful whenever I corresponded with him with any questions, whether by phone or through e-mail. My point is, if you have something to address to John, just e-mail him and I'm sure he will answer you.[/QUOTE

As for John Bishop, I too have found him to be easy to correspond with in this forum, and he has not in anyway, as far as I know, held back in any of his responses...therfore, I have no need to e-mail him at this point, but thank you for the suggestion nonetheless.

As far as the "Mitose saga" goes, I DO have a vested interest in the outcome, therefore, I DO want an unbiased, no stone left unturned investigation. If that can be accomplished, well then I will owe an apology, and will give it sincerely...

 

[Mekugi]

Not many people would know these kinds of things unless, well, you knew about it.

Generally, if you want a Buddhist name, usually you have to A) Die B) Become a monk or C) do something extraordinary and get some kind of honorary recognition (Sometimes after death as well).

Usually, if someone dies, you would pay a tithing to the temple to get the name. Usually, the loftier the fee the more prestigious the name. In that case, the name would be on record there at the temple it was given.

If one became a monk, there is no secrecy about it; the name would be given, you would be recorded as to where you became a monk and the name you were given. All the specifics would be kept in check.

If you did something extraordinary, and were given a Buddhist name, again it would be recorded.

Like that there.

Always,

-Russ

I don't know anything about a buddhist name having to be registered I do believe that was what he claimed his buddhist name to be on his buisness card. Whether he was telling the truth I cannot say.

kelly

 

[kelly keltner]

I'm sorry professor I thought in an earlier post on a seperate thread someone had stated that John Bishop was hired to do some of the investigation on James Mitose for the A&E special. I could be mistaken. If I am I apologize for my lapse of memory.
One other thing in response to post #16 in this thread. I would direct you to post #7 in the thread entitled: What is kenpo/kempo. Don't forget to take note of who the author is on both posts.


Kelly

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

" You can't know where you're going to if you don't know where you came from".

Prof Shuras:

You know I'm with you on most stuff most of the time. But I fail to see how one is unable to look forward without looking back. I don't drive the countryside with my gaze fixed in the rear-view mirror. I tell my history buff students that the kenpo history is a mess, made worse by politics and paper trails, but that they should be grateful to the forefathers for their ingenuity because it has, at each level and regardless of the causes, created a fine family of systems to study.

The butterfly does not emerge from its coccoon concerned about life as a caterpillar; it concerns itself with the business of being a butterfly, and proceeds with life from that point, forward. Snakes to do not ponder the fates of their shed skins. Phoenix's arise from the ashes to fly off, not pick through the ashes looking for the bones of their former selves.

Respectfully,

Dave

 

[Karazenpo]

I'm sorry professor I thought in an earlier post on a seperate thread someone had stated that John Bishop was hired to do some of the investigation on James Mitose for the A&E special. I could be mistaken. If I am I apologize for my lapse of memory.

Kelly

Kelly, as far as I know, it was Professor Abregana who is doing the A&E investigation and it was he who has so far unraveled some of the Mitose mystery. Don't forget though, Mitose is only part of this investigation. Possibly John Bishop is being consulted on other pioneers whom he has personal and documented knowledge of. Remember, John was a very popular free lance writer for all the major martial art mags for years! I do know when John and I spoke of the Mitose situation it was in confidence and was from information he received from Professor Abregana. I kept my word and did not mention anything on these forums or to others until John was ready and posted about it publically (the true Okinawan connection, etc.). Since then, I have spoken to Professor Abregana personally and he is the one who came upon this new information so, again, as I said before, the Professor has no hidden agenda and is simply following leads just like a police detective conducting an investigation. He has no vested interest. Mekosho, you stated you do have a vested interest. Could you please explain? I mean, it appears you are of the Kosho ryu system. So what if Mitose took the basis for his style of kenpo from the Motobu lineage via Tabura Tanamaha? As Mitose stated his art is still Chinese in origin since Okinawan Kenpo credits the Chinese as the prime contributors or their art. Mitose stated one of his ancient relatives, Kosho was responsible to bringing it from China to Japan. Well, Kusanku, the Chinese emmissary/general brought Chu'an fa from southern China to Okinawa, Japan and even left a form with his name and low and behold, one of the spellings of Kusanku is KOSHOkun! Ancient relative could have actually mean't kenpo brother, we use that term all the time, 'our kenpo brothers'. Some embellishment there? yeah, but there is much embellishment in all arts. One of my lineage charts in my school is Nick Cerio's Kenpo Family Tree of Black Belts. Now, my wife and I are listed on it. It shows Professor Cerio directly under Professor Chow and above Chow's name and to the right (facing the chart) it has the name of James Mitose leading to Chow and over to the left, it has Father of William K.S. Chow with a line leading to Professor Chow. First of all, where's Gm. S. George Pesare who Professor Cerio received the bulk of his training from and made his first black belt in Karazenpo Go Shinjutsu of which Cerio's Kenpo is based? Secondly, we're back to another myth, Chow studied Kung Fu, I believe the claim is Hung Gar from his father who was a Buddhist priest! You know what recent research has shown about that! My point is, this did not cause us to tear down the lineage chart and question everything Cerio had taught us while we were with him. So what? These inaccuracies and myths are expected and our generation is expected to clear them up! However, it's certainly not taking anything away from our knowledge and abilities and what we have done with the art. 21st decendant? I don't know about that if this proves true. That one the Kosho guys may have to eat along with the training at Shaka In Temple in Japan. Some are asking for John Bishop to call Hanshi Juchnik? Why? John has no vested interest in this either, outside his opinion on the matter taken by legitimate interviews he conducted. If I had such a vested interest and I was Hanshi Juchnik and had evidence to support Mitose's claims then rest assure, I would be on the 'horn' with Professor Abregana, on the computer or at my fax machine making sure everything I got goes into the A&E investigation, as a matter of fact, if I was head of the system, I'd fly out if I had to in an effort to preserve it's integrity! This is in no disrespect to Bruce Juchnik, despite some of the negative comments on this forum from some, I've also heard many, many good things about him too. I'm just saying, if there is hard evidence out there, why in the world are the powers to be of Kosho ryu not presenting it! If no one comes forward from the Kosho camp then please don't curse Professor Abregana if you are not satisfied with the investigation when it airs in 2005. It's not too late, get it going! Respectfully, Professor Joe Shuras

 

[kelly keltner]

"me are asking for John Bishop to call Hanshi Juchnik? Why? John has no vested interest in this either, outside his opinion on the matter taken by legitimate interviews he conducted." prof Shuras

Dear professor
John Bishop made a statement about documentation That others claim to have. he has been given an oppurtunity to see that info ,yet he chooses not to. Why? because it's info that contradicts his legitimate interview? Come on. As I have shown earlier he has posts on this forum that seemingly contradict themselves. It is ok to make a statement and the retract it or even offer an alternative theory when evidence to the contrary is given. In previous posts in a different thread John Bishop has corrected me and I have apollagized for my inacuracies. Yet I don't see him making any concessions when discrepancies arise regarding one of his interviews. I'm not saying he lied. I'm not saying professor Young lied. I'm saying there is a discrepancy in the interview that he did with professor Young, and with what professor Youngs certificate states. I asked in a previous post if John had recorded the interview? If he has done this then that would go along way to clearing this matter up. I have yet to recieve an answer to this question. So it would seem to me Mr. Bishop has a vested interest in seeing this question cleared up.

And yes I do think there should be some corespondence between Professor Abregana and Bruce Juchnik and Mike brown for that matter. I am working on that. I don't give a rip who calls who as long as some kind of dialog is started. Why would professor Abregana not call hanshi Juchnik? Why would hanshi Juchnik not call professor Abregana? I question any hesitancy on both parties part.

kelly

 

[Karazenpo]

"me are asking for John Bishop to call Hanshi Juchnik? Why? John has no vested interest in this either, outside his opinion on the matter taken by legitimate interviews he conducted." prof Shuras

Dear professor
John Bishop made a statement about documentation That others claim to have. he has been given an oppurtunity to see that info ,yet he chooses not to. Why? because it's info that contradicts his legitimate interview? Come on. As I have shown earlier he has posts on this forum that seemingly contradict themselves. It is ok to make a statement and the retract it or even offer an alternative theory when evidence to the contrary is given. In previous posts in a different thread John Bishop has corrected me and I have apollagized for my inacuracies. Yet I don't see him making any concessions when discrepancies arise regarding one of his interviews. I'm not saying he lied. I'm not saying professor Young lied. I'm saying there is a discrepancy in the interview that he did with professor Young, and with what professor Youngs certificate states. I asked in a previous post if John had recorded the interview? If he has done this then that would go along way to clearing this matter up. I have yet to recieve an answer to this question. So it would seem to me Mr. Bishop has a vested interest in seeing this question cleared up.

And yes I do think there should be some corespondence between Professor Abregana and Bruce Juchnik and Mike brown for that matter. I am working on that. I don't give a rip who calls who as long as some kind of dialog is started. Why would professor Abregana not call hanshi Juchnik? Why would hanshi Juchnik not call professor Abregana? I question any hesitancy on both parties part.

kelly

True Kelly, but that's all John has to lose. He has nothing financially at stake nor is he failing to protect the integrity of his system, in Hanshi's case, the Kosho Shorei Kai! This is what I mean when I use the word 'vested'. This A&E investigation is very, very important to the future of the Kosho ryu group and therefore it is incumbent upon Hanshi Juchnik to make contact. Professor Abregana already knows of the Okinawan connection to Nabura Tanamaha and Mitose but did Mitose inform Juchnik of this during those prison visits? And if not, why? I have never heard about Tanamaha and Mitose before, why?