Hello all, Simple question right? How do you "define" Hapkido...all answers will be right - do you define it technically, philsophically, spirtiually, from a teachers perspective, or a combination of the bunch... If then you can define what Hapkido is, then also try to list what it is not - careful, try not to offend, be general if possible. This should be interesting. I will save my response unless the thread need a jump start so as to not taint the question.
How do I define Hapkido/What Hapkido is: Hapkido ,to me,is the use of Core Concepts and Principles which define the art. An All encompassing art,effective in all ranges of combat. An Aiki art ,in that it is the unification of energy It is also a Jujitsu in that it is true self defense. (I mention the above as they show how the art principles and techniques conform to the arts origin of Daito Ryu AikiJujitsu) Linear,angular and circular employment. Specializing in Circular movement. Closing the Gap. Balance disruption. Joint Manipulation. Basic ,low line kicks to stop,distract or destroy a target. Push/Pull,Ying/Yang,Give /Take.(which ever term suits you) Conforming to the attackers pressure,power,direction and redirecting it. Hapkido is an evolving art as we can conform it to fit the needs of changing times against changing weapons and changing attacks. The ability to use the techniques to avoid,stop,inflict pain,take downs to limb destruction to terminating an opponent. The above are Technical in nature but also a form of Philosophic concepts,such as yielding to the attack,give and Take,push and pull as we try to become one with and ghost/shadow the attacker and become his /her intent as we are considering mankind and his intentions and how we can Affect it as a whole. The spiritual is an individual concept as we are talking a New York concept here rather than that of a Korean taken to another country and then he returns with this art. Look at how Spirituality,History of events and Time changed the conditions and concept of Ueshiba's Aikido What Hapkido is Not: Hapkido is Not intended to be a sport,as once makes the contrast of sport and Self Defense in an art then one employs rules which should not be a thought in a confrontation. Hapkido in its full use is not for Kids under 13-14 because we attack joints and manipulate growth plates. Hapkido fits the needs of the user and can be used to stop and or destroy the intent of an enemy. If one understands what Hapkido is then Hapkido provides all we need in Self Defense.
ahhm if someone asks me what it was and if I briefly wanted to explain it I'd say its a mix of taekwando's kicking (with a bit of variation), Judo's throwing and aikido's circular movements mixed in with various joint locks.
JimH, fantastic response, I don't think I can follow that up. This question reminds me of a question that my instructor would ask during testings. He would say "If you were to describe Hapkido to someone who had never seen any martial art, what would you say to them?" Of course, I don't think there was a wrong answer but it really made you stammer in the middle of the testing trying to state the answer eloquently. First I would list the types of self defense techniques: Hapkido employs punching, striking, kicking, throws, jointlocks, groundfighting, and weapons techniques. Also it stresses health of the practicioner through, physical fitness, meditation, abdominal breathing exercises, and later on accupressure. It also strengthens the mind, attitude, and spirit through constant training. Hapkido is a never ending journey striving for The Way of Coordinated Power
Because I think this is a worthwhile discussion (that grew out of that SEO In Sun thread discussion), I think the following is important to raise. While I think JimH's and Jointlock's postings are a good start, they seems to lack one thing: differentiation. Most, if not all, of what was posted could be said about a lot of arts. And not just distinctively different arts, but also (especially?) the Hapkido sister arts like Kuk Sool (which I bring up again because of the SEO In Sun discussion). So if one is going to fully define Hapkido, I think it's important to ensure one shows where it's place is as a unique entity in the world of martial arts. But, if that's impossible to do, is that necessarily a bad thing?
quote coc716 "Most, if not all, of what was posted could be said about a lot of arts. And not just distinctively different arts, but also (especially?) the Hapkido sister arts like Kuk Sool (which I bring up again because of the SEO In Sun discussion)." ......................................................................... While the definition of the Art of Hapkido may fit the same definition of other arts,like Kuk Sool won,Hwarangdo,Aikido,Judo,BJJ and other similar Aiki Jitsu arts,they all fit a similar definition as they are all extracts and core priniciples of the same art of Jujitsu ryu, It just so Happens that Hapkido,Aikido,Kuk Sool,Hwarangdo are specific out growths of Daito ryu,so to ask for specification as principles and Practices are the same ,from the same core art, is a hard goal to fill. We can say that Hapkido has Kicks,Meditation and things that should differentiate it from the other arts but this is not so. Some say Kicks and Meditation were not introduced under Choi yet we can Find Meditation,kicks and strikes in Aikido and other arts depending on the time of instruction and the spiritual and philosophic mind set and attitudes of the founders and others instructors at different times. Specifically defing and pigeon holing Hapkido as a singular art without comparison and without similarities to other similar based core principled arts is not possible.
Which is why I said: I just think it's an important thing to consider "what makes Hapkido unique" in the "let's make/find the definition of Hapkido" process. I'm not saying there won't be overlap in some ways with other arts, and perhaps you're right that showing that overlap shows roots and relations that are important in defining Hapkido. But if there isn't any demonstration of what makes Hapkido unique as a martial art, then really what is Hapkido?
Coc716 To me and by my definition and resposnes,I Do not Believe Hapkido is Unique. It cannot be Unique as it was and is an art taken from Japan,Daito Ryu,so Daito ryu and the variants of it also relate to Hapkido,where as an art like JKD ,Bruce Lee's art ,was self created and formulated by him,extracted from many forms and arts yet soley (at that time) Lee's singular creation. Not so with Hapkido. ...................................... Iron ox Yu say that you would not count Kuk Sool or Hwarangdo as Forms or variants of Hapkido/Daito ryu,yet they are ,they are based off the core Principles of Hapkido,they were at one time Pure Hapkido (both arts) In sun seo and In Hyuk suh started out teaching Hapkido. The Lee Brothers taught Hapkido and even when they came to the US under the name Hwarangdo they taught hapkido. The Lee brothers had Kuk Sool Won before In Hyuk Suh did they not? Pictures of Early Hwarangdo school show the Lee's and prominant HAPKIDOISTS together under the Banner of Kuk sool Won. The lineage of Hapkido out growths also show the Lee's having it first. They are variants of Hapkido and Daito Ryu. .................................................... I know Choi had kicks,I had opportunity to train under GM Chin Il Chang,Choi's LIVE IN student a purist,lol,,my remark was basically to those who say that the Kicks added to Choi's teachings define or diferentiate it as Being Hapkido which as I said was untrue,as even if true kicks are found in these other arts so it is not a definer of Hapkido. ............................................ One does not have to site other arts to define Hapkido,my original definition did not site other arts from the technical side. But Hapkido was not a singular creation ,it is another art,Daito Ryu ,and it has Variants and relatives with the same core priciples so it is not a singularly defined art,it is not Unique,it is a Japanese art repacked by a Korean to fit the needs of another Korean Judo/Yudo player and what they developed became the context of the teachings of Choi's Yawara (Jujitsu) which later became termed Hapkido.
I am going to take you to task on these statements as I belive they need more explanation: To say Hapkido is not unique would lead me to question whay anyone would then get rank in one of its variants?
Again,Hapkido is not a singular designed art by Choi ,it is a Korean Version of a Japanese art,Daito Ryu. Again if one does not have opportunity to train with those in Various arts then look at video/DVD of them. I have had opprtunity to train under an Originalists teaching of Hapkido,I have Had Opportunity to train under a Top Aikido student Of Ueshiba,I have had Opporunity to train Under Judo/Jujitsu players,I have opportunity to train under a practioner of Daito Ryu ,I have had opportunity to train under Combat Krav Maga and I found the core art,core techniques to be THE SAME. (now if many claim these arts are different are they speaking of the core Principles or the attitude and approach to combat?) I have watched Kondo in his DVD series and it is what I do in my Hapkido. I have watched Ibarra on his DVD series and his Daito Ryu and it is what I do in my Hapkido. I have watched Masters of Jujitsu in their DVDs and see what I do in My Hapkido I have watched Ueshiba in Vido and see what I do in My HapkidoI have watched Yamada in Video and see what I do 8in my Hapkido I have watched Seagal in his aikido video and see what I do in Hapkido Sorry to me if one is a purist one must see the similarities over the differences,the differences begin when one looks at the additional kicks that are said to make Hapkido unique,but those originate under Ji Han Jae not under Choi and his direct line. As to the Ranking of in Hyuk Seo and the Lee Brothers I do not know them ,nor have I seen any documents,but such is the case for most of the GMs and Legends. There are articles by the Lee Brothers and in Hyuk suh in which they say they trained with Choi and were ranked (many say they trained privately and this is how the Lee Brothers and In Hyuk Suh became friends) Was not Kuk Sool Won technically founded by Kim Woo Tak first? Then the Lee Brothers?,Then In Hyuk Suh? Did Choi not give Joo Bang Lee an 8th Degree? similar to what they say he gave Ji Han Jae? I am sure some have seen the following but perhaps others reading have not: http://www.hwarang.org/Personal.html http://www.allmartialarts.com/KIXCO/History/history/map.htm http://www.hwarangdo.com/Magazines/blackbelt11-00.htm We can only go by what is written and claimed by these men as we do not have verification of any thing,just peoples words on training and their Bio's.
I agree that we can only go by what is written - but, given the fact that both of these organizations have re-written their histories a few times now, I think they have little credibility in that regard. I am suprised they are not just as happy to be variants that currently enjoy a certain level of popularity.
Just for clarity, I would like to point out that In Hyuk Suh and In Sun Seo not only spell their names differently, but also pronounce the names differently. There are split accounts as to why, but really it's not important. What is important is that GM Seo insists that the open hand techniques that he teaches come directly from Choi DJN... ... Also, Kuk Sool Won actually originated as the Kuk Sool Kwan, which was one of the original Kwans, and the general consensus is that it was opened initially by Kim Woo Tak.
