Talk:Jujutsu

message: Can someone provide an ancient illustration or depiction of Jujustsu? thank you. Asian888 (talk) 01:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Picture for History Section 

message: There seems to be validity for Kumi Uchi being a seperate art. Perhaps it deserves its own article?
Interesting video on kumi uchi here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=42xTel5viUg&NR=1
User5802 (talk) 06:51, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Should Kumi Uchi have it's own article? 

message: There's a section that mentions "The Chinese Character ..." in two places.  This should be the "Kanji" character.  Kanji is the generic term for that type of character used in multiple Asian languages.
206.222.194.162 (talk) 20:20, 19 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Language termonolgy 

message: As far as I know the word jujutsu does not  literally  mean the "art of softness" nor "way of yielding", however it is in my belief more an approximative translation.
I am not completely sure of this, nor do I have any quotable material, however (again; as far as I know) Japanese is extremely difficult to precisely translate to English (or any other Western language).
Besides, "ju" also means 10, as shown here in the article Japanese Numerals.
How about editing it to "a possible meaning of the word "jujutsu" is "the art of softness" " or "an approximate translation of the word "jujutsu" is "the art of softness" "?
--DKDexter999 (talk) 18:46, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  The meaning and translation "Jujutsu" 

message: There's been some edit warring on the spelling in this section. Questions:
* Is "Sport Jujitsu" a style with its own discrete history, under the oversight of some governing body (perhaps the Ju-Jitsu International Federation or some other organization)? Or,
* Is sport jujutsu a generic term for all organized competitive jujutsu, of which many styles and organizations exist (only certain segments of which are under the purview of governing organizations that use the Jujitsu spelling)
The spelling in this section should hinge on which of these two questions is gets a "yes" answer. My first impression, based on a little googling, is that it's the 1st question, and that either Sport Jujitsu (or Ju-Jitsu) should be used in this section, but that the section needs tweaking to explain the relationship between the organized competitive sport and jujutsu more generally. Just a guess at this point.
Regardless of the answer, edit warring is not an effective way to get changes implemented. Show us why the changes are right! /ninly(talk) 16:32, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Concur with Ninly about edit warring, and note that the term has been  to "Sport Jujitsu" again, 4½ hours after Ninlys' post here. I have also tried to  with an involved editor, but they did not reply. Are we to say, Jujutsu/Jujutsu, (as the article is named) but when adding a sport element,"Sport JuJitsu" not "Sport Jujutsu"? That seems to be the view point being pushed here by several very new editors. Personally for me it has always been ju-jutsu or jujutsu. If the Brazilian version wants to call it "Jujitsu" thats fine, in articles related to Brazilian Jujitsu, Ju-Jitsu International Federation or similar. - 220.101 \ 11:31, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have posted on that talk page, too, but it seems to get blanked consistently, indicating that the user has little interest in actual discussion beyond edit summaries. That user , too, and later blanked those comments (see the 3 following diffs). I have just now  that is making similar changes – assuming it's not the same user or a cohort, since that page shows a history of page blanking, too. /ninly(talk) 16:21, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

text: Thank you 'Catfish Jim'. The pro BJJ pov seems to have spread to Guard (grappling) too. (please excuse my un-AGF). @ Ninly, yes I saw those posts, and noted the similarity in edits and blanking. Certainly odd that up to 3 new editors arrived later making edits. (though some were reverting our 'original BJJ' editor, if I recall correctly). I may have triggered this by  fighters'  article to be more encyclopaedic! :-( <sigh> - 220.101 \ 14:08, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sport Jujitsu/jujutsu 

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://smaa-hq.com/articles.php?articleid=10. Content entered in 2003; it seems likely that more content was entered at that time, but I have not been able to identify a source that clearly predates the article. Many mirrors of Wikipedia have picked up the content since.
Identified infringing material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences or phrases. Accordingly, the material may be rewritten, but only if it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Moonriddengirl (talk) 10:46, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: Please watch the contributions of this user, their edit was completely ridiculous and appears to be personally motivated. They claimed Japan didn't adopt neo-confucianism, which is a major point in the development of modern jujutsu. There is an actual article on neo-confucianism in Japan Neo-Confucianism in Japan and its opposing philosophical schools Kokugaku who tried to expel foreign influence from Japan especially confucianism. For those who speak Japanese here is a Japanese government website with the same details, http://www.city.miki.lg.jp/bunka/jugakusha.html. This will also be added as a reference for further deterrence which shouldn't be needed. 27.33.143.93 (talk) 18:53, 1 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry if I made a mistake on name or categorization. In Japan it is called 朱子学/Cheng-Zhu school or 儒学/Confucianism (no "neo" prefix), not 宋明理学/Neo-Confucianism. But I still don't understand the philosophy had anything to do with the Ming government's emissaries. Oda Mari (talk) 05:51, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: As for the dissection, only Daitoryu says Yoshimitsu did it and it's not verified. The first recorded dissection in Japan was 1754 by Yamawaki Toyo. See  This is the translation. This Daitoryu page says " The detail of its development in the Edo period (1603 ～ 1868) and before is not clear. There are no books or no records about Daito-ryu". If you could read ja, see this. I think it is more accurate to say "it was said that Yoshimitsu..." . As for quan fa, I could not find any Japanese jujutsu pages mentioning it. I'd like to know when and where in Japan did the emissaries visit? And who saw the demonstration? Because it was not easy to meet foreigners in Japan and I think not many people saw it. Oda Mari (talk) 08:34, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

text: I believe I understand your meaning, although it appeared you were opposing Neo-Confucianism. It was at a time of political importance with the ending of Hideyoshi's war which had caused great strain to Korea and China. The adoption of neo-confucianism which was the state ideology of Korea and China, was of great relief to those nations as it meant Japan was unlikely to invade, so political exchange and cross-cultural was opened during the early Edo period (especially with issues such as the wokou). Quan Fa had no importance to jujutsu, although I do see how that article change can be interpreted that it may have. It was trying to portray the opening of cross-culture between the neighbouring counties and their martial arts (focussed on striking techniques) which influenced the development of more striking techniques in jujutsu at the time (which were later reduced). However, to reduce article size or "waffling on" I simply used one example from the book although it lists many other examples, such as a single Samurai family called the Shimazu clan annexing the Ryuukyuu Kingdom (homeland of karate). Therefore I agree and have changed that part (the reference is old and difficult to translate) although I believe the change in general is well informative and improved the article a lot. I regret the misunderstanding in those couple of sentences. 27.33.143.93 (talk) 08:22, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

text: If there is a difference of opinion, you should discuss it here. Please have a read of WP:AGF before making accusations of self-interest. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 08:58, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Neo-Confucianism 

message: In the description section, there is a bit describing the contents of jujutsu training:
:In jujutsu, there are five main sectors ("arts") of training. The first, the Art of Blocking, is used to defend against attacks. The second, the Art of the Fulcrum Throw, is employed in modern judo. The third, the Art of the Non-fulcrum Throw is employed through throws that involve little or no contact with the opponent. The fourth, the Art of Escaping (Hakko-Dori), is very crucial in many styles of Jujutsu. The fifth is the Art of Striking (Atemi-Waza).
:
This was added in 2008: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jujutsu&diff=195904600&oldid=195542379
The description is a part of some specific jujutsu system and their system of organizing things. Most jujutsu schools do not separate their curriculum in such a way, and certainly no traditional Japanese jujutsu system does. Most likely the text is copy&paste from some modern jujutsu school description.
I strongly recommend deleting the entire paragraph as it doesn't really add anything that has not been said elsewhere.
80.223.84.100 (talk) 21:21, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Misleading text on page 

message: Daito ryu Aiki Ju-Jutsu has no proof of being an koryu just some claims by its members. They just want to sound more important that's all and that 9. century nonsense is just wet dream of them. So unless they can prove it with historical documents its just a lie and it shouldn't be listed as koryu. Me176.76.94.156 (talk) 16:32, 26 February 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Daito ryu Aiki Ju-Jutsu 

message: "...although many who study judo still believe as Kano did, that judo isn't a sport but a self defense system creating a pathway towards peace and universal harmony through the art and physical exercise." - This is very wrong. Judo practioner all know that Judo is a sport, but they also say that Judo is more than a sport, heavily affecting the mind and spirit, like all martial arts are meant to do. It's not a question of "or" but a question of "and". So I strongly suggest the author to learn some basic logics. 178.197.234.33 (talk) 04:32, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Judo 

message: What are the prerequisites to include a martial art as a descendant art? For example, yes it has been said by certain martial artists and historians that catch wrestling was influenced by jujutsu. But it has also been said that for example judo was influenced by western wrestling too(as in case of fireman's carry). However nothing of that is mentioned in judo article, let alone having it under parent arts. Same in jujutsu article: just blanket term of Native Japanese Martial Arts parenthood. No mention of possible Indian or Chinese influences. So in this light, how much info of how prominent jujutsu influence we have to call catch wrestling a descendant art? In catch wrestling article it looks better balanced since Jujutsu IS mentioned, but after several other parent arts. In here it seems bit awkward finding catch wrestling among sambo, judo or aikido; styles that have heavily borrowed and built upon jujutsu.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.84.98.87 (talk) 22:32, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Catch Wrestling a Descendant Art?

message: These are mentioned in the text along with kempo, but I can't be the only one who doesn't know what they are, and I have read quite a bit of stuff about martial arts. How about explaining them a bit even if they are not entirely related to this article, or link to somewhere where they are talked about. 62.78.251.108 (talk) 19:27, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Removed the terms - I really don't know what they are either.Peter Rehse (talk) 07:51, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  hakuda and shubaku 

message: What we know of jujutsu developed in Japan in the early 16th century.  One of the earliest schools was founded by Takenouchi Hisamori (Takenouchi-ryu) but it is pretty much understood that there was not a single point origin of jujutsu.  It would be very incorrect to say Takenouchi was the founder of jujutsu.Peter Rehse (talk) 17:12, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Founder

message: Classified as a "hybrid" style rather than a "grappling" style? I think are dealing with the ancestor of Japanese grappling arts. Kortoso  (talk) 00:21, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Hybrid"? 

message: I'm no expert or authority on this; that's why I consulted the article.
But imho there are serious mistakes, howlers even, in the very short opening paragraph.
First, the word "jutsu".  What I've always heard before is that "do" as in judo means Way,
as in a discipline or practice, often a spiritual method.
So kendo is a sport or art using the sword; kenjutsu is actual combat with the sword.
If judo means the "Gentle Way", then jujutsu would be the combat equivalent; "gentle fighting" wouldn't be a good translation,
but it's fighting based on "softness".  (Of course it's not soft, really.  When you get thrown down hard or caught in a painful joint lock, it doesn't feel soft.  I don't know how to translate the whole term jūjutsu in a way  that really captures it, but my point is, "jutsu" means "fighting", or "fighting technique", maybe, as opposed to non-combat skills, not just "technique", so as far as I can see this is a mistake.
Second, fighting armed samurai with your bare hands?  Seriously????
If barehand fighters with the right training could really fight armed samurai, why would the samurai bother with weapons and armor?
Barehand fighters can NOT fight armed samurai!  Give ma a break.  This is just myth and legend.  It's misinformation, and needs to be changed.
So what good was judo?  It was good for fighting thugs and highwaymen, maybe; for acting as a bouncer in a brothel. It was good for an armored samurai when he closed with an opponent on the battlefield, maybe.  The article says that striking "proved ineffective" against armored opponents.  As if!  You wouldn't have to try it to know that you can't punch an armored knight!  Well, armored knights can't punch each other either; when you've dropped  your sword or you adversary has gotten inside your spear, what you want to do is throw him down, not trade punches with him, breaking your knuckles without hurting the enemy.
But you might as well go up against a machine gun with your judo skills, as a trained samurai with a sword or spear.Wood Monkey 18:06, 28 August 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Booooogus! 

message: An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect :Dschiu Dschitsu and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2022 May 5#Dschiu Dschitsu until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion.  Steel1943 (talk) 17:55, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Dschiu Dschitsu" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: The redirect Combat Jujitsu has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  Certes (talk) 18:15, 9 July 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Combat Jujitsu]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]]