Judo--style or approach?

[arnisador]

In this thread, someone suggested that Judo was not truly a new style but rather a way of viewing jujitsu systems:

As for Kano and Lee, both of them did not really come up with a style, rather a way of looking at martial arts and training.

I disagree: I think there are things new enough in Judo to make it a new style, even if no particular technique was new. What do others think?

 

[J-kid]

I believe Judo is its own style.
There are alot of similarities and i would say they are 80% the same yet diffrent.

 

[KenpoDragon]

I had the opportunity to study under a 6th degree black belt in Judo and 7th in Jujutsu.His teachings as far as Judo went emphasized more on the "sport" aspects of it the "ippons" and techniques of the throws.Although when it was just the adults he would teach the Jujutsu sides, the breaks,joint locks and the most powerful chokes.He even showed us the throws that are illegal in Judo tournaments.Mr.Kano in my opinion simply took aspects of Jujutsu and modified them in his image.Much like every other martial artist does.I am not in any way saying that Judo is not a different system from Jujutsu,I believe that there are several differences.Although a lot of martial artists as well as regular people believe that Judo is more of a sport than a martial art.This is mainly because of its introduction into the olympics.Just as some people believe that Tae Kwon Do is a sport not a martial art.Just like boxing too,does this mean any of these are not martial arts,certainly not.They are all forms of fighting,forms of self-defense.In my opinion Judo is a softer form of Jujutsu,after all we have to look back at when these martial arts were created and why.Jujutsu was used by the samurai of old days to use as a defense when their sword was knocked away.They needed a style that would be able to bypass their opponent's heavy armor.The Japanese samurai armor was accessable at the joints,the elbows,the knees,and the neck.Therefore a lot of Jujutsu styles emphasize on those particular joint locks.It is similar to the different names of certain styles,for example some people write JiuJitsu,Jujitsu,Jujutsu,or even JuiJitsu.I personally don't understand this since "Ju" means Gentle in Japanese and "Jutsu" means art.Wouldn't it make sense then that JuJutsu makes up The Gentle Art??? Can anyone tell me what JiuJitsu means in Japanese??? Everyone does what they see fit to with the knowledge they have,whether it be adding to it,taking away from it,or changing it completely.Of course this is only my opinion,hope it helps though.

With honor and respect:asian:
KenpoDragon

 

[Matt Stone]

"Ju" does mean "gentle" or "soft."

"Do" means (literally) a path or road.

"Jutsu" refers to techniques and methods.

So, more appropriately, "Judo" is the Path of Gentleness, and "Jujutsu" is the Method or Technique of Gentleness.

The difference seems small, but there is a lot more implied in the meanings.

I'm sure RyuShiKan could shed more light, though.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[Don Roley]

Actually, if you look at Judo at the beggining when Kano formed the Kodokan, it was more of a philosophy. Over time, it developed into a style. The same thing can be said about Bruce Lee and JKD.

When Kano founded Judo, he started testing it, subjecting it to competition and such to see what would work and what would not. I remember reading a case where the Kodokan guy took a practicioner from a jujutsu school to the gound, only to find out that gound fighting was this school's specialty. They then absorbed a lot of the school's teaching into their program. Kano sent people to train in other systems like aikido to see of they had anything to offer his system.

It was a few decades between Judo was created as an orginization and when Judo became a style. Now days you can say that a certain technique is not a judo technique, but in the first few years of Kano's Kodokan, there was always the chance that he might pick up a new technique and add it. Now that is almost considered blasphamy (sp?). Same thing with JKD.

The new thing they came up with was an outlook, not the actual techniques. In the age when you were expected to conform, this was a revolution. My comment was with people that came up with their own techniques and styles when the modern age allows us to do things in our training that Lee and Kano were the pioneers of.

 

[KenpoDragon]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
"Ju" does mean "gentle" or "soft."

"Do" means (literally) a path or road.

"Jutsu" refers to techniques and methods.

So, more appropriately, "Judo" is the Path of Gentleness, and "Jujutsu" is the Method or Technique of Gentleness.

The difference seems small, but there is a lot more implied in the meanings.

I'm sure RyuShiKan could shed more light, though.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

Thanks yiliquan1,but my real question was not what Jujutsu meant it was what do the other written forms mean i.e JiuJitsu,orJuJitsu,know what I mean??? I always noticed that Brazilian Jujutsu is spelled Jiujitsu,why is that???:asian:

 

[Abbax8]

According to Kodokan Judo by Kano, the real difference between his judo and the various other ryu's which he studied was in the selection of techniques. He selected techniques that he felt conformed to SeirokyoZenyo- Best Use of Energy. He explicitly stated the principle of Kuzushi, and incorporated it in all nage waza. Kuzushi of course is not something one invents, but it seems that it was Kano who was the first teach it as a central part of all throwing techniques. Over the years techniques have been added to the syllabus and deleted. The last major change was 1982. What is central to Kodakan Judo is the two principles Kano taught, Seirokyo Zenyo- Best Use of Energy, and Jita Kyoei- Mutual Wefare and Benefit.

Peace
Dennis

 

[Matt Stone]

Originally posted by KenpoDragon
Thanks yiliquan1,but my real question was not what Jujutsu meant it was what do the other written forms mean i.e JiuJitsu,orJuJitsu,know what I mean??? I always noticed that Brazilian Jujutsu is spelled Jiujitsu,why is that???:asian:

There have been a lot of different methods of transliteration over the years... The one they are using is outdated and flatly incorrect.

Romaji, as taught by Japanese language teachers, has only a few variations in its spellings.

The spellings you list above (i.e. "Jiujitsu") would not be pronounced "joo-jootsoo," but rather "jee-oo-jeet-soo," which is would be something else entirely.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

 

[arnisador]

Originally posted by Don Roley
Actually, if you look at Judo at the beggining when Kano formed the Kodokan, it was more of a philosophy. Over time, it developed into a style.

This I could accept.

 

[MountainSage]

It seems to me that Judo is more like a philosophical sport art that had down played the really deadly stuff and JuJitsu is more of a hardcore self-defense military art. I have no experiance in either style.

Mountain Sage

 

[KenpoDragon]

Originally posted by Yiliquan1
There have been a lot of different methods of transliteration over the years... The one they are using is outdated and flatly incorrect.

Romaji, as taught by Japanese language teachers, has only a few variations in its spellings.

The spellings you list above (i.e. "Jiujitsu") would not be pronounced "joo-jootsoo," but rather "jee-oo-jeet-soo," which is would be something else entirely.

Gambarimasu.
:asian:

Thanks! I new they were doing it wrong!:asian:

 

[Bod]

Judo was originally a set of Jujutsu techniques.

To restrict judo competitions to those techniques (the safe ones anyway) rules were developed.

Interpretation of those rules has led to a huge body of knowledge on those techniques, and variations of the techniques. For almost all of the throws there are variants which look partly like one throw, partly like another. Between opposites such as a forward throw like Tai Otoshi and a backward throw like O Soto Gari you will be able to find stylists using a throw somewhere on that spectrum, which is a bit of one, a bit of the other.

This is accepted, a throw is not wrong because it is not the traditional demonstration version.

I consistently use a throw which is a long way from the demonstration version. It is a variation on a variation of Uchi Mata developed by Hitoshi Saigo in the 80s. My teacher, a traditionalist, has nothing against it, because it conforms to the principles. This is probably because every part of the throw is from a traditional throw, just applied in a different combination.

This technique may survive the rigors of time and competition, it probably will not.

Is it judo? Of course. Is it jujutsu? Well it's not part of the syllabus of any ryu as far I know.