Kosho Shorei Ryu

[BlackCatBonz]

flying crane.......you are right on with your interpretation.
danjo......you still dont understand
john bishop.........they're old japanese folk stories
kroh......right on
kelly.....amen brother

 

[BlackCatBonz]

her is something from the pages of "what is self defense? (kenpo jiu-jitsu)"

" The waza or tricks in the following pages are but a small number of the thousands in this amazing art of Kenpo Jiu-Jitsu. After you have finished the exercises and your speed and ability in-creases, you yourself can invent and practice them in your own way.
Kenpo is sense. Sense is more important than tricks so try to build up your senses"

its not about techniques......

 

[Flying Crane]

How about the followers of Mitose felt that the curriculum needed to be codified so that it could be taught to a wider range of students? Codifying techniques also brought it more in line with many traditional MA styles that had set techniques.

The key is in the use. Tracy's system has a technique for just about everything and yes, they are redundant in some cases but was the purpose of this to have a set answer to every attack? I certainly hope not. The way it was presented to me and the way I present it to my students when asked is this, a technique is a short story in which an attacker presents in a certain way and reacts in a certain way. The purpose of this is to teach you to move in the proper manner and expand your repretoire. In an actual attack, you cannot expect to think "gee, it's a right hand punch from my right side, I think I'll do Hands of Manchu". To me, it's the end result that matters. As long as it's the same, I don't see a problem with either path.

I do like your hypothesis. Unfortunately, we may never know the correct answer.

Yes, I agree with what you are saying, the use of the codified techniques is useful and, as the Kosho guys have alluded to, it is more difficult and nebulous to master an art that has a less codified system. I certainly can attest to that from my years training Capoeira. And I am not trying to detract from the Tracy or EPAK or Kajukenbo or any other system or curriculum. It is what it is, and it is still useful and logical. I actually find the whole idea quite funny, that just perhaps what we practice as a system is the result of a historical misunderstanding or a mistake. It is a real hoot! On the other hand, it certainly could have been a deliberate choice made to make it easier for new students to learn. Either way, it is still a valid approach to training.

However, this theory would also explain all the redundancy in the Tracy curriculum. Perhaps over time, similar themes were revisited or simply came up repeatedly as the "technique of the day" to work on. Each time it was worked on it would inevitably be somewhat different from the last, but the underlying principle and approach would be the same. But if they got coded repeatedly as a new and separate technique, suddenly we have a curriculum with a lot of redundancy.

 

[kroh]

Thank you for the response, Kroh.

This opens up a whole line of thought for the kenpo lineages that derived from Mitose and Kosho. This would include anything from William Chow and Ed Parker.

If it is true that Kosho focuses on perfection of the basics, the ability to spontaneously and creatively use the basics in any situation that arises, rather than develop a catalog of Self Defense techniques designed to answer against a specific type of attack, then this actually reinforces a suspicion that I have had for a long time.

My Kenpo training is from the Tracy lineage, which traces back thru Ed Parker, William Chow, and James Mitose. This type of Kenpo has a huge number of self defense techniques, designed to answer against every imaginable attack. Some of these techniques are quite useful and logical. Others are quite useless and make little sense. I have wondered how these were developed and why they were kept in the system, especially the less logical ones. I think I may have found the answer in this thread.

What I am about to say is all hypothetical. I have no proof, but it stems from my own pondering. If anyone can verify, or dispute what I am about to state, please do so.

First, we have to assume Tracy Kenpo does in fact trace its lineage back to James Mitose Kosho Shorei Ryu. Now if Mitose trained Chow, and Chow trained Parker, what was actually being taught? If it really was Kosho, then it would have been principles for sponteneity and creativity, like I discussed above. Somewhere along the line, the spontaneous "Technique of the Day" became codified into a formal Self Defense Technique. But it was never intended for this to happen, according to original Kosho. Who codified the techniques? Was is Chow? Parker? Tracy? I don't know, but I do know that EPAK has a lot of self defense techniques that still have a lot of similarity to Tracy kenpo. This suggests that it would have been no later in the lineage then Parker. So maybe Chow or Parker codified the techniques? I don't know. But this answers why so many Unuseful techniques found a place in the system. Someone who learned the technique as an exploration of movement and creativity that happened to be the topic of the day misunderstood the lesson, and carved the movement into stone and made it a codified technique. Could it be possible that the entire curriculum of the EPAK and Tracy and other related kenpo lineages were the result of a misunderstanding? Someone missed the basic lesson that was: none of this stuff is meant to be codified. It is only meant to explore possible movement and possible solutions to an attack, but not meant to be kept forever in the format practiced on that particular day.

Wow, what an implication this is.

:bow:

 

[eyebeams]

Technique is applied theory and principles in action. Every style has principles and techniques to demonstrate and teach them

An art or style without techniques is not an art or style. It is just a thought or idea and an unproven theory.

If one can master the art of Kosho by merely being told of the secret principles or reading about them, then it is not much of a style.

With this idea of no techniques, you can just put up a web site explaining the principles and the whole world can become Kosho Masters in a few days.

If you have no techniques, what do you do in class? Just sit and talk about it?
How do you defend yuourself if you are attacked? Explain the theory of Kosho to your attacker and he just falls down?

This idea of "no techniques" is just stupidity.

This is where the Japanese language helps. Some arts emphasize many waza (techniques), other henka (variations) of a few waza. My own lineage emphasizes henka and only formally identifies five waza.

 

[eyebeams]

I don't know if Kurosawa's movie "Seven Samurai" was taken from a book, or a written screenplay.
For anyone who has seen the movie, they will remember the part where a bandit takes a young girl into a house/grass hut, and threatens to kill her if the villagers don't pay him a ransom. One of the seven samurai talks his way into the house and frees the girl. And no the samurai in the movie was not named "Kosho".
This story is repeated in Mitose's book "In Search of Kenpo" decades after the movie came out. And the samurai was credited as being one of Mitose's ancestors, named "Kosho".
So what is it when you take a story and a character from a book or movie, put the story in your book, and rename the character with your last name? And then claim that he was your ancestor?

Honestly? Sometimes it's plaigiarism, and sometimes it's folklore. Folklore is often attributed to ancestors, worldwide, even if it did not literally happen. As for the Seven Samurai, I've herad that large parts of it are bits of folklore strung together in the narrative, such as the aiuchi contest, which I'v also heard attributed to Takuan Soho and Yagyu family traditions.

 

[eyebeams]

How old was the storyline? Did it pre date the movie? What was the source document?
How many times are plots used over and over in movies and T.V.?
How many times have you watched a movie and knew how it was going to end?
Is that plagarism?
Let's face it it may be a stretch of the imagination, but plagiarism I don't think so. It's a book of stories meant more to teach lessons than anything else. Mitose was less than a stellar individual
so he used a technique that's been used in Hollywood for years of recycling stories, come on.
By the way Danjo I have a copy of the book myself.
On another note, John how's that A&E special comming?
kk

It's reasonable to posit deception on Mitose's part, make no mistake about that. I do not think it is the sole possible conclusion for In Search of Kempo, but it is one of the strongest possibilities by far -- just not the only one.

 

[jdinca]

Yes, I agree with what you are saying, the use of the codified techniques is useful and, as the Kosho guys have alluded to, it is more difficult and nebulous to master an art that has a less codified system. I certainly can attest to that from my years training Capoeira. And I am not trying to detract from the Tracy or EPAK or Kajukenbo or any other system or curriculum. It is what it is, and it is still useful and logical. I actually find the whole idea quite funny, that just perhaps what we practice as a system is the result of a historical misunderstanding or a mistake. It is a real hoot! On the other hand, it certainly could have been a deliberate choice made to make it easier for new students to learn. Either way, it is still a valid approach to training.

However, this theory would also explain all the redundancy in the Tracy curriculum. Perhaps over time, similar themes were revisited or simply came up repeatedly as the "technique of the day" to work on. Each time it was worked on it would inevitably be somewhat different from the last, but the underlying principle and approach would be the same. But if they got coded repeatedly as a new and separate technique, suddenly we have a curriculum with a lot of redundancy.

Somehow, we've got to find out. It's just to fascinating an idea to just leave it hanging.

 

[Flying Crane]

Somehow, we've got to find out. It's just to fascinating an idea to just leave it hanging.

Yeah, but I don't know how. On Tracys website, they used to post a statement that he was going to tell the story of how all the techniques came into being. This was a couple years ago or so, but the statement is no longer there, and I haven't been able to find anywhere on the site where he posted the information. Maybe I should just send him an email and ask how they came into being.

meantime, I just imagine some student in the back of the dojo, sitting down after class and taking notes on everything that happened that day. We would all think of this as the Good student, but perhaps in this case he was the Confused student.

 

[jdinca]

Yeah, but I don't know how. On Tracys website, they used to post a statement that he was going to tell the story of how all the techniques came into being. This was a couple years ago or so, but the statement is no longer there, and I haven't been able to find anywhere on the site where he posted the information. Maybe I should just send him an email and ask how they came into being.

meantime, I just imagine some student in the back of the dojo, sitting down after class and taking notes on everything that happened that day. We would all think of this as the Good student, but perhaps in this case he was the Confused student.

GM Tracy has had some serious health problems in the last couple of years. My guess is that's why there's been no follow up.

 

[BlackCatBonz]

if you read through some of the articles on the tracy website you will see where a lot of the techniques came from.....an easy person to ask would be Ted Sumner, he is a straight up guy and an 8th dan in the Tracy system.

kosho uses drills to teach and help the student understand principles. a movement drill is much different from a self defense technique.
you do not use techniques learned in a self defense class to defend yourself....thats almost as silly as saying you use kata to defend yourself.
the purpose is to understand the underlying principles of natural movement so that one movement could be understood to apply to many different situations.

 

[kelly keltner]

Like I said, I don't know if Seven Samurai came from a book, legend, or just a screenplay. I just explained the identical story being credited by Mitose in his book, to the exploits of a Mitose ancestor. And the book does not appear to be one of fiction. It's supposed to be stories of how Mitose's ancestors used their kenpo techniques and philosophies.
People can make their own judgements on whether it's technically "plagarism".

I guess it would be like you writing a book about this English nobleman who had his properties and title taken away by the Kings evil brother while the king was off on the crusades.
And then this nobleman, who by the way was your ancestor, decided that he would ride around the forest with his merry men and rob from the rich and give to the poor. You could call him Sir Kelly of Loxley, or just Kelly Hood. Now would that fit the legal definition of "Plagarism", or would it just be sleazy.

About the A&E documentary? You'll have to ask Jaime Abregana about his progress on it. Abregana, Jaime [email protected]

Ha Ha how'd ya know about my family history.
thanks little John
HA HA
kk

 

[kelly keltner]

Thank you for the response, Kroh.

This opens up a whole line of thought for the kenpo lineages that derived from Mitose and Kosho. This would include anything from William Chow and Ed Parker.

If it is true that Kosho focuses on perfection of the basics, the ability to spontaneously and creatively use the basics in any situation that arises, rather than develop a catalog of Self Defense techniques designed to answer against a specific type of attack, then this actually reinforces a suspicion that I have had for a long time.

My Kenpo training is from the Tracy lineage, which traces back thru Ed Parker, William Chow, and James Mitose. This type of Kenpo has a huge number of self defense techniques, designed to answer against every imaginable attack. Some of these techniques are quite useful and logical. Others are quite useless and make little sense. I have wondered how these were developed and why they were kept in the system, especially the less logical ones. I think I may have found the answer in this thread.

What I am about to say is all hypothetical. I have no proof, but it stems from my own pondering. If anyone can verify, or dispute what I am about to state, please do so.

First, we have to assume Tracy Kenpo does in fact trace its lineage back to James Mitose Kosho Shorei Ryu. Now if Mitose trained Chow, and Chow trained Parker, what was actually being taught? If it really was Kosho, then it would have been principles for sponteneity and creativity, like I discussed above. Somewhere along the line, the spontaneous "Technique of the Day" became codified into a formal Self Defense Technique. But it was never intended for this to happen, according to original Kosho. Who codified the techniques? Was is Chow? Parker? Tracy? I don't know, but I do know that EPAK has a lot of self defense techniques that still have a lot of similarity to Tracy kenpo. This suggests that it would have been no later in the lineage then Parker. So maybe Chow or Parker codified the techniques? I don't know. But this answers why so many Unuseful techniques found a place in the system. Someone who learned the technique as an exploration of movement and creativity that happened to be the topic of the day misunderstood the lesson, and carved the movement into stone and made it a codified technique. Could it be possible that the entire curriculum of the EPAK and Tracy and other related kenpo lineages were the result of a misunderstanding? Someone missed the basic lesson that was: none of this stuff is meant to be codified. It is only meant to explore possible movement and possible solutions to an attack, but not meant to be kept forever in the format practiced on that particular day.

Wow, what an implication this is.

Excellent

kk

 

[Doc]

GM Tracy has had some serious health problems in the last couple of years. My guess is that's why there's been no follow up.

Over they years since Mr. Parker's death Al has promised to tell the "real story" on a lot of different topics on various sites. He usually begins with a "teaser," then creates some controversy, and then it just fades away. He's even alluded to some of the things I speak of in SL-4, and was going to elaborate on its origin. Never happened. My favorite is how he scanned mitose's entire book onto the site and offered descriptions of the pictures that bore no relationship to what was actually there. I guess he thinks everyone is gullable. Unfortunately, many are.

Al has had some amazing accomplisments in the arts, and holds many "firsts" in the industry. He really has no need for this kind of puffery. His true accomplishments all stand on their own, but it appears his desire to discredit and distance himself from Parker tarnishes what would be a remarkable lifetime achievement, and definitely no less than Parker.

 

[Flying Crane]

Over they years since Mr. Parker's death Al has promised to tell the "real story" on a lot of different topics on various sites. He usually begins with a "teaser," then creates some controversy, and then it just fades away. He's even alluded to some of the things I speak of in SL-4, and was going to elaborate on its origin. Never happened. My favorite is how he scanned mitose's entire book onto the site and offered descriptions of the pictures that bore no relationship to what was actually there. I guess he thinks everyone is gullable. Unfortunately, many are.

Al has had some amazing accomplisments in the arts, and holds many "firsts" in the industry. He really has no need for this kind of puffery. His true accomplishments all stand on their own, but it appears his desire to discredit and distance himself from Parker tarnishes what would be a remarkable lifetime achievement, and definitely no less than Parker.

I do appreciate your comments on this. Thank you.

 

[jdinca]

Over they years since Mr. Parker's death Al has promised to tell the "real story" on a lot of different topics on various sites. He usually begins with a "teaser," then creates some controversy, and then it just fades away. He's even alluded to some of the things I speak of in SL-4, and was going to elaborate on its origin. Never happened. My favorite is how he scanned mitose's entire book onto the site and offered descriptions of the pictures that bore no relationship to what was actually there. I guess he thinks everyone is gullable. Unfortunately, many are.

Al has had some amazing accomplisments in the arts, and holds many "firsts" in the industry. He really has no need for this kind of puffery. His true accomplishments all stand on their own, but it appears his desire to discredit and distance himself from Parker tarnishes what would be a remarkable lifetime achievement, and definitely no less than Parker.

Well put.

 

[Danjo]

her is something from the pages of "what is self defense? (kenpo jiu-jitsu)"

" The waza or tricks in the following pages are but a small number of the thousands in this amazing art of Kenpo Jiu-Jitsu. After you have finished the exercises and your speed and ability in-creases, you yourself can invent and practice them in your own way.
Kenpo is sense. Sense is more important than tricks so try to build up your senses"

its not about techniques......

Hmmmm....let's see. Techniques, i.e., kicks punches, blocks, stances are pretrty much what the art is defined by to a certaijn extent. I'm not talking about the various combinations that are demonstrated. Techniques are different from art to art. For instance: a front kick will look different and be chambered differently depending on the art. Same with a punch, block etc. The "waza" or "tricks" you refer to are merely pre-set combinations, not techniques. So, are the techniques taught in Kosho the same as they are in the first Mitose book? Since there is no footage extant of Mitose performing them, how are they delivered etc.? How would they differ from say Kajukenbo or Shotokan, for instance?

 

[BlackCatBonz]

ok....i think we're on the same page now, danjo.
the basics, as in techiniques, are taught just like they would be in any japanese martial art. There are a few things that would be unique to kosho....but you wouldnt get it if i explained it.....it's just something you have to see.
the application.....which some people would refer to as the techniques, are not set, as in say epak or Tracy's.
the application in kosho is based purely on principle. there are no set techniques ....no pirouettes of death, or young duck parts hen's mane.
you simply look at a situation and work a defense naturally, applying principles of natural movement.
you're not gonna get it reading it from a book......you're not gonna get it by watching a video. it is something you must learn by doing, while having someone who knows what is going on can correct you.
the stuff in mitose's book looks just like any other karate in pictures.....because you cant see the movement. it's more circular in nature. i can see it in the pictures, and i can also see how that stuff might have been made up on the spot.
as to hanshi juchnik not knowing what mitose taught because he couldnt have possibly seen it done....ok, let's say it is like that.
he did have thomas young and paul yamaguchi, 2 of mitose's original black belts, help him in understanding more of the physical art.

 

[Danjo]

Okay. Thanks.

 

[Flying Crane]

Question for the Kosho People: Does the art include Kata of any kind?