Kempohands

From what I can gather, BJJ is one small piece of the much greater whole that is traditional Japanese jiu-jitsu. JJJ has all of the grappling and ground work that you will find in BJJ, but also has many stand-up techniques, dynamic throws, strikes, standing grappling, locks, take-downs, and small joint manipulation. I'm not sure how it happened, but the originator(s) of BJJ learned some JJJ and really honed their skills in one particular sphere of it, and then taught that set of skills. This could be one reason why it as the name "Brazillian Jiu-Jitsu" and not somehting else, because it is not really its own new style, but a small piece of an already existing style. Again, I'm not sure as to how accurate that all is, so I look forward to reading further elaboration and specified explanation.

One of my favorite stories concerning this general subject... I was teaching a kids' brown belt class once, and I was in charge of a sparring ring. I brought in one of the quicker, more aggressive brown belts who had just won his last 2 matches and put him against a girl who was a 3rd brown (black candidate) and one of the best fighters in the class. As soon as I pointed to his opponent he looked at me, took his mouth piece out, and said "But she's a girl." "So what?" "I can't fight a girl; that's not fair." "I think it'll be fine, don't worry." From the word "fight!" she absolutely overwhelmed him, not only with technique, but actually just imposed her will and was too aggressive for him to handle her offensive. After the match he was absolutely in shock that a girl had so decidedly beaten him. I took this opportunity to remind the class that being a boy or a girl has nothing to do with one's skill and ability, and that to judge your opponent by his or her sex could be dangerous and unwise. Now, when I put her in with him originally, it was NOT to prove a point or put him into a potentially embarrassing situation. I was just trying to make a good match, as they were two of the best fighters in the class at the time. However, I was happy to be given this opportunity to bring up this idea of girls somehow being weaker and less capable then boys. In the world of martial arts, this is unfortunately a pervasive issue. While there is certainly a biological distinction between male and female -- one which does indeed affect, in some ways, how a martial artist approaches certain parts of training, like self-defense for example -- this sometimes, unfortunately, translates to a divergence in the amount of respect or seriousness given to practitioners of different sexes. So back to the original post, I think you handled the situation very well, and I am happy to see you caught your mistake. I've found myself in situations before where I said something to a student and realized after the fact that it was un-called for as well, and I've learned from them. It's a great thing when people are willing to see faults in their actions and better themselves. On a final note, hopefully we can slowly eliminate these kind of remarks from the training halls as we try to help female students to be taken as seriously as their martial arts brothers. From what I've seen, we're not all the way there yet, and little things like recognizing situations like this can help us get there. Thank you for the story sensei8!

Where to begin? I guess we'll start at the original question. I think we can say that while these things which call opposites are indeed opposite one another, they are not diametrically opposed or mutually exclusive, but rather mutually dependent, as Lee put it. I don't think Taoism, at least early Taoism originating in the Lao Tzu, would say that inherent in every individual act is both good and evil, so that nothing can be 100% good or 100% evil. Instead, an individual is either acting with or against the way (the Tao). Good and evil are categories which originate because of each other, in that in order to recognize one, people must know the other: "When the people of the world all know beauty as beauty/There arises the recognition of ugliness./When they all know the good as good/There arises the recognition of evil." This is indeed similar to the Buddhist doctrine of dependent origination. As mentioned, Buddhism is a philosophy concerned with how to best live one's life morally. However, the metaphysics of Buddhism are central to these practical implications, and it is here we must look to try to understand the balance concept. To Buddhists, what we perceive as reality is an illusion, and is not truly the greatest reality. The reality which we perceive, and to a certain degree which we actually construct, is made up of concepts which adhere to the doctrine of dependent origination, this being the idea that everything which is, is so because of something else: "On ignorance depends karma; On karma depends consciousness; On consciousness depend name and form; On name and form depend the six organs of sense..." So from a Buddhist standpoint, again the balance is not necessarily in reference to each individual act being both good and evil and thus no act could be pure good or pure evil, but in reference to the origination of our illusory reality. For when it comes to practical concerns, Buddhism is very explicit in many cases about which behaviors are good or evil. As for intent or result being the important thing when judging an action as good or evil, I may disagree with tonydee, though I am not a Buddhist and am operating from the standpoint of an interested individual rather than a practitioner, so I'd appreciate further explanation of this. But I've found two passages which point me to believe that evil or good is somehow connecected more strongly with the result of an action than the intent of the action: 1. "Even an evil-doer sees happiness so long as his evil deed does not ripen; but when the evil deed has ripened, then does the evil-doer see evil." 2. "Even a good man sees evil so long as his good deed does not ripen; but when the good deed ripens, then the good man sees the good." Although reading over those again as I type them makes me thing the judgment of the act as good or evil happens before the act ripens, and the karmic effect of the act is what waits for the fruition of the action, since in both passages the man is either good or bad before the act ripens. Clarification from a more well-versed person would be appreciated. All in all, I think the idea of mutual dependence is not necessarily a way to negate the possibility of pure good or pure evil actions, but a way to explain the existence of separate actions and our ability to recognize and understand both good and evil in relation to one another. I tend to believe this to an extent, but I am more inclined to think more in terms of positive definitions, similar to Plato's forms, where a concept has a "real" definition of its true essence, a definition above and beyond just saying "it is this because it is NOT that." As far as martial arts implications, I'm much more all-in with these ideas of balance and mutual dependence. In fact, one of my favorite passages from the Lao-Tzu concerns this idea and governs much of my understanding of the martial arts: "In order to contract/It is necessary first to expand./In order to weaken/It is necessary first to strengthen./In order to destroy/It is necessary first to promote./In order to grasp/It is necessary first to give."

Ah, how simple, and yet how profound. I completely agree. I'd personally also add my Sensei as my martial arts hero, as he inspires me in many ways to become a better martial artist and instructor every day.

As an individual who spends a lot of time worrying about and studying language and who is going to school at the moment to study English, semantics, in reference to any subject, bother me. Words are sounds with ascribed meaning. They are meant to be used in the context of their accepted meanings. When we start lazily throwing words around and using them for purposes other than what they are meant to be used for, language itself is de-valued and reality itself becomes blurred. From here we can get into a whole philosophical discussion about the nature of reality, but I believe that it is, to a great extent, a construction by individuals collectively perceiving and describing their existence. In that case, language is the root of reality. Therefore, semantics are definitely important. I also get sort of annoyed when people dismiss an argument over which word should be used as "just semantics" as if semantics can be neglected because of triviality. That's absurd. Words matter. If I call an apple an orange, you'd say I was wrong, not say it was ok because they're both just fruit anyway, and if you did, then I'd say no, they're not fruit, but dogs. Again, we could keep going, but the bottom line is, we need words (or at the most basic and fundamental level, language, which is simply the ability to communicate meaning, be it through words, signs, symbols, math, or music, etc.) to ground our descriptions of what is and what is not. So in short, yes, it bothers me when people incorrectly call a martial art karate or kung-fu or anything else because it is simply incorrect. Yes, we all practice "martial arts," but what's stopping someone from saying that we just practice polo? A final point: I understand where the attitude "it's all just martial arts in the end" comes from. It's similar to the attitude "we're all just people." This kind of thinking, however, de-values individuality and denies the distinctness of identity afforded by correct use of precise language. It is important to remember the big picture, to acknowledge that all martial arts fall under the same big category so as to reconcile prejudices for or against certain types within the big category, just as it is important to remember that all human beings fall into the same big category so as to eliminate prejudice, racism, and ignorant hatred. It is equally important to acknowledge difference. Diversity is a beautiful thing, not to be brushed aside and dismissed with discussions in the vein of "it's really all the same thing." We can celebrate diversity and learn the most from it by acknowledging it and talking about it, and recognizing its importance and significance. So while we all practice martial arts, it is imperative that we use our language (whichever medium we may so choose) precisely and correctly in order to ensure that the distinctness of the particular arts which we practice remains intact. Some good readings on the power of language in constructing reality and the possible effects of changing how words are used, either ignorantly or purposefully, include many works by George Orwell (especially his novel 1984 and his essay "Politics and the English Language"), and Benjamin Whorf. All of this is simply my opinion of course, but as you can probably tell it is very strong. This is an issue that extends beyond the realm of martial arts for me, and has been the subject of a great amount of mental effort. Take it for what it is, one man's opinion. With respect, ouss.

Oh man that's great stuff! I couldn't help but visibly smile after reading that. Glad to hear this ended so justly.

6/25 at the dojo: advanced adult class -- helped other students work their techniques lefty, worked on improvising my own no mind techniques based on concepts and frameworks from set techniques and being able to pinpoint which techniques' concept(s) I was implementing 6/26 1 hr weight training, upper body core workout: -30 sit-ups -40 bicycle sit-ups -2x 20 leg lifts -2x 20 butterfly sit-ups at the dojo: open adult sparring class -- 10 minute warm up, a half hour of sparring...I found myself in position to triangle choke one opponent and was lost as to how to complete it. My sensei's words were "You had 80% of the choke within 15 seconds of going to the ground and you never got it!" So many times this happens to me: I get to the ground and work to get myself to a position where I know I have an advantage, but then I don't know how to execute the techniques which allow me to capitalize...I just need more time and training on th ground and repition with my ground techniques 6/27 at the dojo: open adult class -- 20 minute warm-up, 40 minutes working in groups on technique...worked with two students preparing themselves to possibly test for black belt by the end of the summer; we worked on punch counter techniques with a focus on being as efficient as possible while moving as fast as possible with as close to zero down time as we possible...also continued my work on getting comfortable with my forms and katas lefty...finally, my sensei went over an armbar from the position I found myself in the previous night which wound up causing us to go 15 minutes over the end time of the class working on the ground. So for doing so much in one post...I just felt like sharing a lot

I found tonydee's post fantastically informative and helpful, especially the points made about the faults of the previously mentioned techniques in the thread. I like the approach that the aikido sensei took to the kick, and the technique tonydee described at the end of his post, and I'd like to add a method of defending that I've found good success with so far in my martial arts career for defending against the roundhouse kick. I tend to trap mid-level roundhouse kicks, as I can't reach leg kicks and have many better options for myself against low ones, and I tend to notice a head kick and avoid it because I'm not comfortable trying to trap a head kick and risking a knockout. Now, when I notice a roundhouse kick that is coming at torso level, I will often try to trap it. I often attempt to stop a roundhouse kick by bring my elbow to strike/block my opponent's shin, with my other forearm block supporting in case the elbow misses his/her shin (I don't think that makes the best sense, but it's the best I can do to describe the block at the moment). As soon as I feel the leg make contact with one or both of my arms, I use one arm to wrap over the top or underneath the leg, depending on my fighting stance in relation to which foot my opponent kicked with, and attempt a sweep of the other leg with my free hand up on guard against any punches which may be thrown by my opponent. Really, my technique is not much different from the kickboxing video after the trap occurs, but what I really like is the elbow to shin idea. I find it easiest to do against roundhouse kicks, but I try it against straight kicks as well, dropping the elbow on an opponent's shin as he or she kicks, while fading off line or away from the focal point of the kick of course. It's funny, as soon as my sensei says "takedowns" during a sparring class we all decrease our frequency of roundhouse kicks...

Extremely important! Many people tense their muscles in order to have more power in their strikes, but this is illusory. It warrants repeating: train relaxation! Also, speed can come from flow, which in turn comes from relaxation, correct repetition of meaningful and proper techniques and combinations, and knowledge of body mechanics of not only one's attacks, but how a human body reacts to being hit. You will be faster if you have as near instinctual knowledge the idea that if you hit point A well, it opens up an opportunity to strike at points B, C, and/or D. I refer to this as having at the ready an understanding of the concept of "next logical strike." In addition, speed will naturally come with sparring and experience. At first, your brain has to assess new situations and evaluate what to do in response to an opponent's actions. As you train more and you find yourself in a greater variety of fighting situations, your body will become more comfortable with fluidly moving with the situation rather than making a ridged movement after a conscious thought process. The less your brain is involved, the faster your body will move. Finally, make sure you concentrate on eliminating any wasted motion in your techniques. Your instructors will be a great resource for helping you with this. Of course, all of the advice here is applicable for anybody of any size. Good luck and good training.

6/24 at the dojo: 2 hr. open class -- the last Wednesday of the month we have a special 2 hr open adult class (usually class is 1 hr) where the first hr is dedicated to a heinous workout ---worked on weapon destruction entries off of an opponent's hook punch, interrupting second and third punches, and using the destruction blocks off an opponent's right-left combo to set up our own right hook, which became an entry to a typical fluid, painful Kempo technique

I have to agree with DWx, that was a great analogy. Reminds me of the conclusion of my Shodan test. The last thing our Grandmaster said after we received our new ranks was "Congratulations, you've got the basics. Now you can start really learning." I don't think any of us really understood at the time what that meant, but I know that I do now.

6/22 3 mile run 1 hr weight training, upper body core workout: 50 sit-ups 30 crossover sit-ups each side 30 butterfly sit-ups 30 leg lifts 10 toe touches 10 v-ups 20 hanging leg lifts at the dojo: had a half an hr before I had to start teaching classes...went through advanced pre-black belt forms lefty

In terms of changing fighting styles you gave a lot of food for thought, thanks tallgeese. I definitely see how I've changed a bit in certain ways, while keeping certain cor fundamental aspects of my training as the grounding for my evolution. I also got a reminder last night in class of how much growth I still need to experience in terms of fighting style. I was sparring a technical white belt in our style, though he had about 7 or 8 years of training in multiple disciplines before coming to us, 3 of which were in ju-jitsu, and about 30 seconds into the match I was able to take sweep him to the ground only to rediscover that my ground game is still very poor! So I definitely see the value in cross-training, as does my Sensei, since he brings in a professional fighter each month and a BJJ instructor to give grappling classes. And as for transitory phases, I think my biggest one was the move away from point sparring, which was how I always sparred as a kid, to more realistic sparring for take-downs, decisions, submissions, etc. Being able to hit to the face or grab a kick completely changes things and forces you to adapt. I'm glad I did. Thanks to everyone who's shared their thoughts so far!

6/20 2 mile run 1 hr weight training, lower body core workout: -3 min plank -50 bicycle sit-ups -30 butterfly sit-ups -20 leg-lifts -10 v-ups -30 hanging leg raises At the dojo: Open class for all ranks, 20 min warm-up, 50 min working in groups on techniques and forms -- reviewed all pre-black belt punch counter techniques and attempted a few forms lefty

I think what really caught me was a response I made to a topic about throwing the first punch where I replied that I would absolutely NEVER throw the first punch in a confrontation and always wait for an aggressor to be the first one to throw a strike. As I've gotten older and see more subtle shades of gray in life, I have changed this opinion drastically, and have practiced many of my self-defense techniques set up to work off of committed punches to work off as entries to begin a fight once I know a fight is going to occur and the aggressor already has his or her hands up. Of course, that's just one piece of it, but probably the biggest one for me.