I am sharing this to allow better understanding what Oyata Seryu's art comprises. I do not follow RyuTe or, Tuite Jutsu, or Kyusho. This is just to allow a better understanding for those interested.
Tuite Jutsu (Personal training/teaching methodologies in Te)
This “Blog” will discuss various techniques (from my own “point of view”), training methodologies, and applications used and taught by myself in the art of “Te”. It will often focus upon the instructed art of “Tuite”, as taught to me by Taika Seiyu Oyata.
https://nagarate.blogspot.com/2010/
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
You Show, I Show, We All Show, "Kyusho!"
The (obvious, LOL) obsession with Kyusho -and it's relation to RyuTe-, generates a lot of inquiry's to this blog. As I have stated previously, we don't overly focus/concentrate on it, as it is simply another portion of study contained within it's curriculum. We don't utilize any confusing and unrelated (in our opinion) concepts (TCM, BFD, S.H.I.T.) to determine these factors, and student's are taught these principles in conjunction with their standard instruction of techniques (i.e. no “special” classes or “restricted” member/group mandates). Many of the points utilized, will (often, because of the “slow” practice being utilized) only create a minor reaction from their use, but student's are taught to use, and identify them when/where they occur and prove to be the most effective.
The following are some of the basic principles that we teach to our student's in relation to Kyusho (point) utilization, these are also used to identify the factors/conditions that create those situations that allow for their use (and are also used to demonstrate/validate/discredit any principles/methods or techniques presently being taught or experimented with). We make every attempt possible to identify (for the student) the physical/neurological reasons for the demonstrated responses to the applied techniques. (Note* A Pain response/reaction is not considered “acceptable” to be the sole, or only factor for determining a technique's effectiveness). Very often, body motion/reaction (in response to the point's utilization) is the desired result from a point's use.
Accepted Application “Rules/principles” (presently utilized)
(The following are principles that we presently teach/explain to our student's during the instruction of technique application)
Muscle Activation, IS Nerve Activation
Nerves permeate the entire body. They control every physical action made by an individual. Any strike which creates a perceived pain, could be argued as being, and is in fact a nerve response. RyuTe strikes are intended to be directed upon predetermined locations (points) which cause/create specific responses upon the receiver. This is more easily accomplished, when strikes are directed upon “active” (ie. “firing”) nerves/muscles.
Active vs Relaxed (Muscle)
When a muscle is in use (i.e. “active”), from/because of it's contraction, the nerves that control/create that contraction, are considered Active. If the muscle is in a relaxed state, then they are dormant (Inactive). Though, when dormant (and responses are often much less), they can still be achieved, but higher levels of accuracy and/or power may be required to create a desired reaction.
Body weight activation of Muscle(s)
When/if one's body weight is being carried/maintained by any particular limb (and the muscles contained therein) then that limb's nerves/muscles are considered to be active (or activated).
Note* (This is also referred to as being “Loaded”, the act of creating this state/condition, we refer to as “Loading”, and is directly related to “active/activated”)
Cross-Crawl, (for determining “viable” targeting)
An Understanding of the “Cross-Crawl”(a.k.a. “C-C”) application of body motion, is imperative for understanding the recognition of active/relaxed muscle groups. This theory describes the body's (natural) balancing properties/actions, and how they are applied to any/all actions made when one's body is in motion (and/or standing upright). The model for this principle, is the inter-relationship of the body's actions made while walking.
Touch (for “activation”) of Muscles
This type of activation, is an example of the “lack” of required pressure for creating the necessary activation of muscle groups. This is illustrated by having an individual extend one arm forward, then another individual will press against any singular (1) side of the extended hand/arm. The receiver (uke) should note the (resultant) “activated” muscle groups (throughout the whole body) that result from this (minor) pressure. The direction of applied pressure (against the out-stretched hand) should be varied (as to the direction of the pressure being applied) and the resultant changes in response to those variations (throughout the receiver’s body) should be noted. This example is also used to demonstrate that excessive contact/power, can be detrimental to a technique's application (“tuite”, being the best/easiest example of this principle).
Same-Side activation
Although “C-C” creates specific cross-body actions/responses, there are also Same-side results/effects that are created from the activation of specific “points”.
Body weight activation / C-C Targeting
This is in reference to the C-C theory (of activation) of the diagonal quadrant(to the “activated/struck” limb/point) area of the body, and it's utilization for determining preferred targeting towards the corresponding/interrelated quadrant of the body .
Additional student study includes:
(Though related to the above principles, these often apply to individual target striking methods)
Muscle belly vs Muscle Tendon (and/or conditions that would affect either)
Directional Muscle Strikes (in-line vs cross)
Muscle “Fold” Strikes (between the muscles) when/where/direction of.
These “rules/principles” are usually shown in relationship to the individual techniques being taught/shown to a student at the time. Again, this aspect is not (overly) dwelt upon (during instruction).
Each of these are subjects which Taika has mentioned while demonstrating/teaching application of techniques. (Again) All that we have done, is to collect those concepts, and have provided a “list” (of them) for our student's use. Whether they choose to utilize them (or not), is their choice.
The knowledge of it's (Kyusho's) use, and/or effects, though definitely(in our opinion) “useful”, are not mandatory knowledge for a technique's effective application, nor for a student's continuing study. Though versions of many of the provided concepts are utilized by numerous methodology's/systems, student's are not always (made aware of ?) familiar with their relationship to a technique's application. In addition, though many of these are demonstrated/explained singularly, they most often are utilized in conjunction with each other (i.e. “multiple” principles are being utilized during a technique's application).
It's my opinion, that this is sufficient (and more than enough) information to explain the majority of what "we" teach (in regards to basic kyusho implementation). Exact targeting and direction (of strikes) is often dependent upon the required result and/or situation (as opposed to simply knowing "where" to strike). That aspect, should be studied/discovered from individual research (meaning "figure it out for yourself", LOL). All of the above theories, can be found (in/on medical related sites) on the internet. They aren't (personally) created or made-up theories, they are established principles that are presently utilized by various medical practices. We are (only) applying them in relation to what we are doing.
If a reader's system/school teaches anything similar (or different), I would be curious to know about it (including any alternative methodology's for determining those locations). What I don't want to be drawn into, is any discussion regarding “TCM” (I've already been down that road, I have all the guiding literature in regards to it, I have read it, and found it to be contradictory, inconclusive and (generally) misleading (in regards to what is being attempted with the application of Kyusho). I also feel it is being unjustifiably utilized to present it's advocates, as being unnecessarily (meaning “unjustifiably”) knowledgeable (in this subject).
Should that be considered “harsh?” (I hope so). “I” consider those individual's as “Con-men”,”Snake-oil Salesmen” and (basically) a waste of (any) of my own, or my student's time.
“If”, (or when-ever) the subject (of TCM) is brought up (much like bile, from a tainted meal) either “to”or “around” him, Taika becomes very frustrated (as he feels you are wasting his time). He considers (and I agree) that the both the subject, and those persons who choose to pursue that subject, are attempting to avoid (actually) researching, and practicing what is already being presented to them.
They're seeking some form of complicated answers, to both explain, and to justify their own inability to understand (that which has already been shown to them). As opposed to researching the “whys”of what has been shown (and can be readily seen, that it works), they instead, choose to pursue some complicated (if not misleading) methodology, in order to avoid that understanding (and thereby validate their own justification for not understanding).
I am familiar with (a couple of) methods (similar to our own), that aren't based around some "secretive" Mumbo-Jumbo. I've partaken in discussions with those individual's before, and we've had (civil) debate's (and actual discussions, in regards to/about them, LOL, so I know that it's possible to do so). I make no claims that the methods that we utilize are the only one's that will work (only that they are what we presently use, and teach to our student's).
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
.png)
