The Lost Kata of Kodokan Judo

[Yannick.Schultze]

Hallo zusammen,

kennt einer dieses Buch und kann mehr darüber sagen?

https://www.amazon.de/Lost-Kata-Kodokan ... ref=plSrch

Ich bin ein wenig verwundert, auf dem Buch-Cover lesen wir in japanischen Schriftzeichen folgende Schreibweise für Kata 型, obwohl doch eher folgende Schreibweise 形 Verwendung findet.

Erstere ist mir eher aus dem Karate bekannt.

[tutor!]

Ich könnte jetzt eine ganze Tirade schreiben..... aber da ich noch nicht in das Buch hineingeschaut habe - und es vermutlich auch nie tun werde - möchte ich mich doch etwas zurückhalten. Ich frage mich bei diesen Dingen immer wieder, woher denn die Autoren ihre Expertise beziehen, besonders, wenn ich so etwas lese: https://www.usatkj.org/bruce-r-bethers.html

Es gibt im Umfeld des Kodokan eine ganze Reihe von Judoka, die die angeblichen „Lost Kata“ kennen und auch in geringem Umfang unterrichten. Darüber hinaus gibt es z.B. die Aufsätze von Carl deCree über einige dieser Kata, in denen vor allem die Quellenlage sorgfältig zusammengestellt wurde.

Natürlich sind z.B. Go-no-Kata, Joshi-goshin-ho, Seiryoku-zenyo-kokumin-taiiku, Nage-waza-ura-no-kata über die Jahrzehnte nur sehr wenig in Japan praktiziert worden, jedoch sind sie nicht „lost“....

[Cichorei Kano]

I agree with what Tutor! writes. it is relatively easy for me to recognize the methodology the author has used for producing his books and "translating" in this and other books in the series... All of you could do this. It's about 1 week of work. You do not need to know any Japanese for "translating" in this way either ...

The issue of the kanji for kata, i.e. 型 vs. 形 is more complicated. It is not simply a mistake. There are other existing examples, such as the use of the kanji 業 vs. 技 for waza, which is often retained in the name Nage-waza ura-no-kata 投業 裏の形 rather than 投技裏の形. Sometimes, it is for historic reasons that old or different kanji are maintained. In the case of the word kata, both kanji can be used as they INCLUDE the same meaning, BUT there are also differences. This is why there are texts in which both kanji are used, precisely to emphasize these differences. This is so in a number of Kitô-ryû texts. The first kanji for kata actually was the one commonly used in most arts. So, there is a reason that Kanô preferred the second one, WHEN used to indicate the name of codified Kôdôkan kata. It's complicated to explain without great detail.There are also historic grammatical reasons, and one can see that the first kanji is more complicated and at the bottom has the kanji for earth 土 (do), one of the five elements. The upper part kei 刑 means penalty. The kanji historically was made to indicate that something was drawn in earth, engraved really, and in this way could serve as a mold from which other things were made, so hence a 'model'. It has been suggested that Kanô was in fact the first one to have chosen the kanji 形 to indicate kata exercises in budô. I doubt that, as I remember both being used in Kitô-ryû densho. So, these differences are not just superficial, but have a philosophical contents and one can write several pages about it, especially if one want to get into great detail into the meaning of kata. It has been suggested that 形 differs in the sense that it isn't really the mold, but the product after the mold has been removed ... This is an important difference. I believe that there exists a text by Kanô in which he talks about it. This is complicated stuff, but not unique. In Kitô-ryû you will also find different ways of writing the word 'tai'. While only one kanji of them is used in modern Japanese, the use of various ways in classical Japanese has a reason, and there are also differences and reasons as to why sometimes one kanji was used and sometimes the other one.

In modern jûdô there also exist inconsistencies. For example, the kanji that is used in Kôdôkan to write the word 'hishigi' in the arm bars, is not normally pronounced 'hishigi'', and 'hishigi' is normally written with a different kanji. In that case, there probably is no intentional reason, and is a simple historic remnant.

Nothing described in there is "lost". Sei-ryoku zen'yô kokumin taiiku just a couple of years ago was even shown during the Kagami-biraki. Some other forms have ended up in disuse for a variety of reasons, but usually were not lost, or at least, --such as in the case of gô-no-kata-- were already recovered or discovered more than a decade again by others. What is really lost is also not in this book, and most includes the first drafts of kata, but to be fair, these are also obsolete, in a sense that Kanô intentionally changed and expanded them. It would likely make not much sense to practice those, and their use would be limited to research to better understand certain evolutions, inspirations and origins. There is one exercise that is considered lost due to the war, but it wasn't originally Kôdôkan jûdô, although it might have served as inspiration to Kanô.

In brief, nothing to worry about, there are no secret lost techniques in jûdô that can make you defeat everyone, and there are more serious things to worry about ...

[Yannick.Schultze]

Hallo ihr beiden,

vielen Dank für die aufschlussreichen Antworten.

Werde mich die Tage nochmals melden. Bin gerade voll im Umzugsstress

Gruss
Yannick