|
Post by garage on Apr 26, 2014 1:08:05 GMT
Funakoshi was a human being not a saint. It was his skill at mulipulating the media which allowed karate to get out of Okinawa to mainland Japan. He clearly he either was a racist, or supported the racist attitude in Japan by trying to change names to hide the Okinawa and Chinese connection.
There is clearly some good stuff amongst the plane silly, but to blindly ignore his short comings and think he got everything right first time is ignoring common sense.
He didn't like sparring, and he boycotted anyone who went against his wishes. Cut the word debate and look at the pictures, what is done in shotokan is a hybrid of what he did. Unfortunatly the original meanings of kata have not survived and we are guessing and adapting what works for us. I am not 5 foot something like Funakoshi so doing it exactly like him is not likely to work for me.
|
|
|
Post by daveb on Apr 26, 2014 7:23:12 GMT
Changing names is not evidence of racism. If it were I'd be racist for preferring the phrase round-house kick to mawashi geri.
Funakoshi wasn't perfect but conflating our 21st century desires for accurate transmission of an effective fighting art, with his early 20th century goal of spreading karate to Japan as a means of instilling discipline and strength to Japan's youth, isn't going to produce a balanced understanding of the man either.
One thing to note is that while Funakoshi was against free sparring, he advocated deep study of kata. To me that implies a teacher who wants his students to study the art handed down not make it up as they went along. And yet what did they do? Ignored him and sparred anyway and made up the rest as they went along. That is where modern Shotokan comes from, not Funakoshi.
In the Hawaiian karate library there's a copy of the original version of Karatedo Kyohan. In that book are a range of pictures showing applications of kata techniques demonstrated on a partner by Funakoshi. Yet these were removed from the modern version. Post war distaste for violence? Or concerted effort to change karate from a form of Chinese boxing to empty handed Japanese sword play?
|
|
|
Post by garage on Apr 27, 2014 10:40:32 GMT
Changing names is not evidence of racism but when it is done to "hide he Chinese connection to make it more pallatible for the Japanese" as described in a number of texts it is.
I have a translation of Karatedo Kyohan with a range of techniques demonstrated with a partner brought in the 70's. I have no idea how this compares with the Hawaiian version. The forward suggests it was translated from 1922 version with later amendments.
Reading your posts apart from these minor details it is really hard to disagree with your posts as, with the limited information we have one cannot help but, come to the same conclusions.
|
|
|
Post by daveb on Apr 27, 2014 16:13:40 GMT
I'll try to find the link to the images in the library.
|
|
|
Post by kensei on Apr 30, 2014 13:45:29 GMT
First off I love readying your posts, you always make me reevaluate my thinking and when I feel a challenge to my current thought process towards Karate I kind of get giddy...being a instructor often means you get alot of "ous men" around you and debate is pretty much left for the internet...or as us old farts call it...the interweb! Funakoshi was a human being not a saint. It was his skill at mulipulating the media which allowed karate to get out of Okinawa to mainland Japan. He clearly he either was a racist, or supported the racist attitude in Japan by trying to change names to hide the Okinawa and Chinese connection. Was Funakoshi a saint, well no. He probably had a lot of faults. Granted not as many were reported as say Motobu or other instructors who were NOT saints in the same way that drunkards who womanize and spend nights in houses of ill repute are not saints...yes, I just said a few of the old time masters visited hookers and drank to much! But Funakoshi was a tea drinking obstainer that as far as we know did not visit "pay as you go" ladies in Japan....that we know of. Was Funakoshi a racist. Well, maybe...we dont know. And to be honest it would not shock me at all, it was the culture that they grew up in! The same way that a land owner in the deep south of the USA at that time was a born and taught to be a racist. But his version was a tad different. They (being Japanese people) did not like anything foreign. They hated China and Korea and only put up with the west because Perry kinda made them. So, his chaning the Kata names to be more Japanese...well chaning the Okinawan names to Japanese names was accepted back then as a minimum way to get Karate accepted. and realize, his instructors (or instructors instructors) changed the chinese names to Okinawan names! so, was he a racist? Maybe, and most probably, but not out of complete vile ignorance, but more out of the more common kind of ignorance...he was never taught any better. And again, his version of racism was probably alot different than our view of it today. He didn't like sparring, and he boycotted anyone who went against his wishes. His reasoning is actually very sound. Those that gravitate towards Kumite very early on and even those that tend to be very Kumite-centric at black belt tend to have only a hand full of good techniques and their form is horrible in every other way. Not only that but the intent of Karate as a self preservation tool was not his goal. He saw karate as a wholistic approach to living, a training tool similar to the Kung fu that was being using in China and the Karate in Okinawa. He also did not see the nice clean Kumite we have today. Stories of the barbaric fights that inter-collegiate clubs were going through at that time scare the hell out of me. they would pound each other till their was blood and losing teeth was common. As an instructor I abore this kind of kumite and when I hear about full contact Karate and kick boxers getting hurt I cringe!Having said that...some kumite and controlled kumite is very important in training...so his polarized view was a tad short sighted. Unfortunatly the original meanings of kata have not survived and we are guessing and adapting what works for us. the meanings from Okinawa have survived. I know its hard to put it together but we have the Okinawan names of the Kata and translations, most Kata were made up on the islands. Those that were not can be traced to China and we even see the names in modern Kung fu forms...most went something like....Sanchin in okinawa/Japan was called San Chzhan in China or Nipaipo in Okinawa/Japan was called Er shi Ba in Chinas white crane style. Only the Kata that were created in Okinawa have Okinawan names, and were change to more Japanese sounding names or he tried to change them completely to new names...and more times than not failed in doing so. We dont know much more about Funakoshi than what was written in his biography and tid bits and snippets from those that trained with him, most of which are passed away now. We wont know why he was the way he was or if it was racist or just a "business man" trying to get his product sold in a market that had racists tendencies.
|
|
|
Post by garage on May 1, 2014 10:20:51 GMT
Hi James you help me to think too.
The orginal meanings I mean the technique rather than the names for the Kata. I always feel that some of the over complicated application of kata where never intended. I am terrible at langauges, I am trying to remember the name of a Kata with 64 moves that I do everyday gojushoho. This is shown as being a 5th Dan kata in some sylbii. In is technique where you shrug off a bear hug. So you wait for a 5th dan kata to break a bear hug. So if this is the application for this kata perhaps perhaps the applications for the 5 heians are completely over cooked, meaning we have found something that was never there.
I found it interesting that if you go to a club you are not known training as a white belt or blackbelt they will dismiss anything you say as out of hand even if they are defying the laws of physics, if you are the instructor they will often agree with you even when you are talking rubbish. Some times I see what rubbish I can talk before someone finally challeges you. Every move I make has application that works for me I sincerely doubt it is much like Funkoshi did. I am taller with longer legs so I can do things he couldn't so I shouldn't limit myself to one version.
If you read Miyagi he seemed to think Funkoshi was a cowboy and wasn't backward saying this.
|
|
|
Post by Allan Shepherd on May 1, 2014 14:38:43 GMT
Hi Bert
Gojushiho has 54 moves as per the title...if you had a mind to and an understanding instructor you can "learn" all 27 kata without thinking about their place in the Dan ranking hieracy. Yes...some organisations have Gojushiho as a requirement for Godan but there is nothing written in stone that says that you cannot learn same at Shodan, Nidan, Sandan etc.
I remember the "shrug off a bear hug" technique being taught at Kyu grade level to set up opponent for empi uchi!!
Best Regards Allan
|
|
|
Post by kensei on May 1, 2014 17:56:25 GMT
The orginal meanings I mean the technique rather than the names for the Kata. Ah, got it, I was taking you to literally. sorry. If you read Miyagi he seemed to think Funkoshi was a cowboy and wasn't backward saying this. Hey, I wanna be a cowboy! Seriously, nobody back then was nice about their peers to their face,but massive butt kissers when in their presence!
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on May 2, 2014 8:32:05 GMT
Just been re-reading the excellent "meditations on violence " by Rory Miller. H professes to be no karate expert but his wife trains regularly and this is a quote directly from the books " To me it looks like kata is all about hands , shoulders and hips working together simultaneously with a drop in centre of gravity ( COG ). This is one of the most potent systems of power generation. This is a potent system regardless of whether the action is interpreted as a strike, a lock, or a throw. " "The more possibilities you see in anything, the more options you have. Since the actions can be interpreted effectively in so many ways, kata maybe more powerful as a training tool if you see none of these (or all of them) than if you decide it is just one of them. As long as the hips, hands, shoulders and COG work together, there is no difference anyway. Karateka get in their own way when they try to dig into the "deeper secrets" of their movements. Learn to move. Kata is excellent for that. Then reproduce or experience the dynamics of actual conflict and you well see how much really valid technique there is in the old forms. " (EDIT: Whoops... just realised I had only read the first page (when it went all a bit off-topic...)and I didn't intend to interrupt the love-in between James and Bert) Ok Back on Topic.. Isn't this just another way of saying that you shouldn't necessarily focus on individual techniques, but understand the underlying principle the kata is demonstrating? The give-a-man-a-fish-and-his-family-can-eat-for-a-day, teach-a-man-to-fish-and-he-can-feed-his-family-forever...concept. Having a go-to technique is good but has limited application, having sound fighting principles can be applied to everything.. clearly you need both, but the point stands. (BTW: I really enjoyed Rory's first two books... absolutely recommend them to anybody who is serious about understand self-protection.)
|
|
|
Post by daveb on May 2, 2014 11:05:48 GMT
But how do you get to understand the fighting principles of kata without first analysing them? How do you develop the skill to use said principles without manifesting them as techniques and drilling them over and over?
Also I think Miller is talking about mechanical principles rather than tactical or strategic. He seems to be suggesting we let the repetition teach us the correct way to move and balance, to learn proper form and then adapt fluidly to what we are presented with.
Again I say, nice idea for those already broadly proficient, but for those not there yet we need a base of skill only found through training specific methods.
I also feel that analysis of kata is the only way to learn the strategies they were designed around, which are IMO the most important part of being able to fight effectively and keep yourself safe.
|
|
|
Post by garage on May 2, 2014 13:57:32 GMT
There is a lot to be said for repetition, as the tiredness finds the most mechnically easiest way to do things. If you listen to your body some people could avoid hip replacements and knee problems. "No pain No Hip replacement"
Then of course there is the arguement that if you are constantly hitting air you are not really helping as you do not getting used to the shock of impact.
When someone says fight you cannot help but think they mean standing face to face. An attack from behind is more effective and less risky, stay in the car and run them over works even better. Not much strategy is need to hit them over the head from behind.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on May 2, 2014 15:09:57 GMT
But how do you get to understand the fighting principles of kata without first analysing them? How do you develop the skill to use said principles without manifesting them as techniques and drilling them over and over? Also I think Miller is talking about mechanical principles rather than tactical or strategic. He seems to be suggesting we let the repetition teach us the correct way to move and balance, to learn proper form and then adapt fluidly to what we are presented with. Again I say, nice idea for those already broadly proficient, but for those not there yet we need a base of skill only found through training specific methods. I also feel that analysis of kata is the only way to learn the strategies they were designed around, which are IMO the most important part of being able to fight effectively and keep yourself safe. Good Point Dave. To my mind this is one of the main reasons I take the view that Kata should be seen more as a lesson plan rather than an instruction manual. As a lesson plan it assumes there is a teacher involved, someone who brings existing understanding of the principles and uses the kata format to explore these with the student. The kata shows useful techniques which demonstrate the themes essential for effective combat. Kata can therefore become a set of revision notes, a memory aid and a physical/bio-mechanical exercise regime for solo study and learning. I think Kata covers both mechanical, tactical and strategic fighting principles. If I was designing a lesson plan, that's what I'd do. Cheers Tom
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on May 2, 2014 15:38:15 GMT
There is a lot to be said for repetition, as the tiredness finds the most mechnically easiest way to do things. If you listen to your body some people could avoid hip replacements and knee problems. "No pain No Hip replacement" Then of course there is the arguement that if you are constantly hitting air you are not really helping as you do not getting used to the shock of impact. When someone says fight you cannot help but think they mean standing face to face. An attack from behind is more effective and less risky, stay in the car and run them over works even better. Not much strategy is need to hit them over the head from behind. Hi Bert Just a brief comment, There are very blurred edges between what constitutes a strategy or a tactic...if I take the definition of Strategy from Wikipedia "A Strategy...is a high level plan to achieve one or more goals under conditions of uncertainty.." (Which if I'm honest is not the best definition I have come across...) ...often the difference between a tactical and a strategic principle is just a timing thing...So your strategy might be "to train in a more realistic way to deal with HAPV style scenarios, practicing preemptive strikes and escapes". Whilst the tactics your employ once in a violent confrontation are use "preemptive strikes and escapes".. I think of strategy as logistics and tactics as re-actions to situations. So your fighting strategies would be to prepare yourself with good technique, good fitness... a car..a gun... etc basically making sure I have all the tools I need to give me as many tactical options to re-act to the situation I find myself in. Cheers T
|
|
|
Post by daveb on May 5, 2014 9:49:50 GMT
I look at strategy as the general plan to take you safely from the start of a conflict to its end.
A simple example would be "move to the outside of the attacks and strike as the opponent readjusts". Now whether you are squared off in a ring or confronted in a bar for looking too long at someone else's lady friend, the plan can be applied as is. If the opponent grabs your lapel or just launches a haymaker the plan doesn't change. This is the kind of thing I look to take from a deep study of kata: game plans (in this case from trekking shodan).
Tactics are situation specific. So when trying to enact the strategy above, my method for getting to the outside of someone whose looping punches force me on the inside, that is a tactic. That is what I get from specific sequences in the kata (in this case from trekking nidan).
|
|
|
Post by garage on May 5, 2014 10:39:32 GMT
I was sitting a pub some people walked in the atmosphere changed, so my strategy was to get up and go home. An hour later the fight broke out and was stopped by the police.
So we could argue that bar room brawling is a sport. I admit to going to bars and starting fights for the practice. We all seem to be reactive full of bravado as we try to be heroes that fight off some unprovoked attack. This really isn't self defence.
You looking at me?
|
|
|
Post by daveb on May 5, 2014 16:49:37 GMT
I was sitting a pub some people walked in the atmosphere changed, so my strategy was to get up and go home. An hour later the fight broke out and was stopped by the police. So we could argue that bar room brawling is a sport. I admit to going to bars and starting fights for the practice. We all seem to be reactive full of bravado as we try to be heroes that fight off some unprovoked attack. This really isn't self defence. You looking at me? Nothing in kata can teach you sense.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on May 6, 2014 9:04:55 GMT
I look at strategy as the general plan to take you safely from the start of a conflict to its end. A simple example would be "move to the outside of the attacks and strike as the opponent readjusts". Now whether you are squared off in a ring or confronted in a bar for looking too long at someone else's lady friend, the plan can be applied as is. If the opponent grabs your lapel or just launches a haymaker the plan doesn't change. This is the kind of thing I look to take from a deep study of kata: game plans (in this case from trekking shodan). Tactics are situation specific. So when trying to enact the strategy above, my method for getting to the outside of someone whose looping punches force me on the inside, that is a tactic. That is what I get from specific sequences in the kata (in this case from trekking nidan). Hi Dave Another good point, I think it is a clear example of the blurred edges between tactical and strategic thinking. I would also look at your example as a self-protection strategy and one that clearly comes out of and is demonstrated through kata study. If your starting point is "don't get into fights" then "move to the outside of the attacks and strike as the opponent readjusts" is a re-active tactic to improve your chances of "escaping".. which is likely to be a secondary goal of your original strategy. However if your context is looking at fighting principles once your pre-emptive strategies have failed then I would agree with your definition of strategy - a set of general plans to improve your likelihood of overcoming you enemy. Another example might be "use both arms to cover and rapidly control your opponents flurry of attacks" - tactical variants of that can be seen at the start of Tekki Shodan, Heian Yondan, Kenkudai etc These "games plans", as you rightly term, are one of the most important benefits Karateka can get from pragmatic study of kata application when applied in a realistic context (close range, potential unknown multiple attackers, HAPV etc). If used to supplement your more classical training it instills a range of fighting behaviours essential for survival in real fights (vs Dojo kumite), that you would not normally get from Punch-kick-block. Cheers Tom
|
|
|
Post by daveb on May 7, 2014 11:23:31 GMT
I just noticed that my phone's predictive text has revealed my study of the secret kata derived from the fighting moves of various Starfleet Captains.
Once you start discussing kata I think we have to assume that we've moved beyond preventative measures. After all, a kata based on conflict avoidance would be the 19th century Okinawan equivalent of sitting in a chair reading the newspaper.
That being said, the point of taking strategies over set piece combinations is that strategies do adapt across situations.
In the bar where the atmosphere changes, keeping a low profile and out of sight of the rowdy newcomers works just as well as an interpretation of "move to the outside of the attack". Equally to raise a new topic rather than answer direct questions is the politicians equivalent of the same strategy.
And if we are looking at the non combative elements of self defence, consider the mental focus a single unchanging plan can offer the victim of an attack.
The more I study kata the deeper my conviction becomes that strategy is key.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on May 7, 2014 12:36:13 GMT
here here.
|
|
|
Post by kensei on May 14, 2014 11:43:09 GMT
Once you start discussing kata I think we have to assume that we've moved beyond preventative measures. After all, a kata based on conflict avoidance would be the 19th century Okinawan equivalent of sitting in a chair reading the newspaper. The only reason I dont like this....is I did not say it...but I am going to use it the next time I teach Because it is so on point! Okay, so for me strategy means the big picture stuff. my stratagy for not getting my butt kicked in this fight is to use Karate and my environment to not get killed. I will use distance and angles to keep away till I can strike a very soft spot with a very hard weapon (Groin meet foot!) the actual tactic is the foot smashing the groin or the fist mashing the nose as I shoot in off an angle retreat to cover distance when the attacker does not realize it. Strategy is used aslo way before a fight, tactics are only really used in a fight. When I was in the army they taught us that their are many tactics but only one strategy in an event, that the strategy is made up of many tactics. So if your strategy is to take out a guy in a bar fight with striking then the actual strikes you employ are part of your tactics. To me, they seem so darn close in theory that they could be the same darn thing really, and while you are worried about strategy and tactics...well Im kicking you in the junk!
|
|
|
Post by daveb on May 19, 2014 7:51:08 GMT
Ahh, but worrying about the difference is the reason we have web forums. It's what's enabled me to refine my logic to the point that when you decide to throw your "Junk" kick, I've already won the fight 3 times over! That being said the difference is pretty important to me at least because everyone has tactics but not everyone has a gameplan or an understanding of why their plan works, to the degree that they can adapt it to all circumstances. And besides all that, the real point is that for me this is what kata are for. It's the real way to get a martial benefit from having kata in a system and devoting time to its study. It is the source of kata's functionality. Also it highlights the point that the many different kata highlight many different strategies which for me are what karate is about. For example the strategy you describe sounds to me to be the general Shotokan approach to combat (please do correct me if I'm wrong). I started on my path of kata study because I couldn't square that approach with the sheer volume of stepping forward with knife hand block in backstance that the Shotokan syllabus has, nor could I work out what I was meant to do if I didn't have room to keep my distance, or got tackled etc. (I'd love to hear what the traditional Shotokan answer is for this). I went to a seminar with a 9th dan, truly superb karateka, and the only senior Shotokan man I've heard of to include some pretty damn brutal applications of kata in his syllabus. But even he admitted he didn't understand the purpose of back stance. So we had a strategy that ignored the bulk of the kata and kata that no one understood in full. 15 Years later and this is my conclusion.
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on May 19, 2014 15:27:30 GMT
IMHO... The Shotokan Strategy side-steps your challenge by not even recognising its existence...
By that I mean the Shotokan approach is based on a stylised concept of combat, which infuses all thinking in terms of Shotokan's view of pragmatic combat tactics. Kata gets demoted to a Historic-Legacy activity for the purposes of teaching "good form" and ignores the inconvenient truth that Kata applications do not appear to add much benefit to the way shotokan practice kumite or fighting.
Strategy becomes a useful way of providing a common set of rules by which to act to achieve a defined set of goals, especially where there are many unknowns and an overly prescribed approach is likely to be a poor fit for the majority of situations. Clearly this is the case in "real life" violent encounters, however if you remove the uncertainty then the focus becomes the development of tactics for the pre-defined situations... such as kumite "in the dojo" using karate style attacks at long range.
This is not dissimilar to what happens to most combat sports - in an effort to create a level playing field all elements of messy unknowns are limited or effectively removed from the equation (weight catagories, the boxing ring for uniform fighting environment, remove the pre-fight game, only single opponents, effect of drugs and alcohol etc). The training regimes then purely focus on the tactics of winning the unique fight scenario defined by the pre-defined rule set... which is probably the best training approach to develop winning athletes.
... the history of shotokan is one of the development of a combat sport not one for dealing with civilian violence, and yet the kata's clearly come from the latter.
|
|
|
Post by garage on May 20, 2014 10:07:03 GMT
Dear Dave and Tom, How can shotokan be tradition? it has only existed in my life time. This idea that it has been around for 2000 years is a bit of a red herring. Clearly going in a long front stance flicking your fingers out so the judges can hear is not what the Kata's are about. So it's a sport.
Why this deep back stance? If you to Kyokinshin they use more a cat stance with the block rotating up from the hip. Like wise Tang soo doo. (Chuck Norris does it so that justifies it self) So if you set the weight over the hips it leaves the front leg to sweep, hook, kick, throw. The hands can then control the head, the head being the heaviest part of the body, will lead the body where you want it to go.
Stances are transitional, being in them makes you a sitting target, so go with the flow. Throwing someone who does karate is always a pain once they have locked up. Catch them before they make stance or hit them with a chair.
My opinion a not very humble one, as my karate training has given me a real bad attitude and I love to argue?
|
|
|
Post by th0mas on May 20, 2014 17:40:36 GMT
Dear Dave and Tom, How can shotokan be tradition? it has only existed in my life time. This idea that it has been around for 2000 years is a bit of a red herring. Clearly going in a long front stance flicking your fingers out so the judges can hear is not what the Kata's are about. So it's a sport. ..no argument from me there Bert. I think you answered your own question... the stance is not important, a deeper stance just implies a bigger emphasis on the movement. I am going to start another thread on this...Back stance vs Cat Stance
|
|
|
Post by daveb on May 20, 2014 18:43:08 GMT
Likewise, I recognize that there is a disparity between the tales instructors have told and the reality of Shotokan, however I am less militant about it than I was.
I actually think the core shotokan strategy is a perfectly valid fighting method. These days I can even see the basis for it in the Hiean kata and I think that the whole focus on basics and timing is, in keeping with the focus on "the way", a higher road to travel than getting bogged down in the minutiae of techniques because ultimately timing is everything.
With this in mind I asks those with strong traditionalist backgrounds about things like kokutsudachi and grappling because I am genuinely interested in what solutions and applications were reached by the "JKA" model of karate.
My trouble with learning karate in that model is that I feel, much as I said earlier in relation to the comments that began the thread, that the advanced path needs a solid foundation of broad arrays of technique types and a solid experience and understanding of the different combative environments and methods.
Without these to advance from, it ceases to be advanced at all.
|
|
|
Post by garage on May 24, 2014 16:18:11 GMT
Hi David, I have read your post and the thing that sticks in my mind is the word advanced. What is advanced violence?
Only a fool learns from his own mistakes when he can learn from others. So for me I want to learn from other s rather than learning from my own bitter experience which I might not survive.
If you look at the explainations from Nakayama in best karate you can see how it might work practically. I do not believe that the katas are particularly deep and meaningful. Having spent a couple of years on each one I think they are simple and straightforward.
What I have learnt with reverse engineering works really well, the problem is now it has become a liability which I can't really justify using.
Violence is really simple chaos is not advanced, there is just lots of simple things lots of times, then you realise it isn't chaos at all and you can move through it. Like comedy timing is everything.
|
|
|
Post by daveb on May 25, 2014 17:54:06 GMT
Hi David, I have read your post and the thing that sticks in my mind is the word advanced. What is advanced violence? My posts refer to methods of training and skill development. To be advanced in something is to have progressed beyond the beginning stages. To call a martial arts training paradigm advanced is a reference to the need for a foundation stage to make those training concepts effective. As for violence, a marine armed with a machine gun has to be a bit of a progression on from a caveman with a tree branch? Can you explain why you feel that your reverse engineering of kata has now become a liability?
|
|
|
Post by garage on May 26, 2014 10:51:42 GMT
The liability has happened because they moves work with brutal results. Upward rising block, grab twist, make the elbow bend the wrong way makes a total mess. You then have to prove intent. I practice so it has become automatic. So jokes can have bad outcomes. When someone says they are going to kill you how do you tell if they really mean it? (none of these being "what if" scenario's.)
I was on a train once many years ago, the guy said if you do not know how to fight the brave thing to do is to fight. He argued if you do, the brave thing is not to fight.
|
|
|
Post by Allan Shepherd on May 26, 2014 12:42:25 GMT
I think we can at times complicate things by dissecting to much with "what if" scenario's.
Funakoshi did not agree with Kumite simply because his Karate had the element of "Do" as a core principle. This does not distract or equate to the fact that his Karate was still a fighting art and it contained all the elements that it entailed. The option was there to follow either or indeed both paths for either inside or outside the dojo.
Everything we need is contained in kihon or kata to apply it to kumite, try doing kata in the various modes of ura, go, ura go etc as they open up a minefield of applying the same techniques that are performed in kata omote from a completely different perspective of direction. Also application of Tai No Sen, Go No Sen and Sen No Sen etc.
Advancement is the process to progress from where we are at that moment in time be it Kyu grade, Shodan, Nidan, Sandan etc.
Best Regards Allan
|
|
|
Post by garage on May 26, 2014 16:45:28 GMT
Does this mean advancement is only possible if there is someone to judge you?
What kind of person was Funakoshi that he didn't need grades to decide how he advanced?
|
|