Long go this was a rather involved discussion's that likely makes little sense today. I believe it was on the Original Cyber Dojo discussion list on Yahoo Groups. I offer it as evidence what knowledgeable passionate martial artists used to discuss like.
In order to properly analyze this question we have to first look at Matsumura's influences: Shaolin Ssu, Ryukyuan Ti and Jigen Ryu Kenjutsu.
You will hear people say that all karate, especially Okinawan Karate, is quite similar. It's easy for the uninitiated to think that a Goju stylist looks pretty much the same as a Shorin or Uechi stylist when watching the performance of atemi kihon or jiyu kumite.
What made Sui-Di (Shuri Te) stand out from Naha Te or Uechi ryu was the lineage?
Both traditions relied on the principles of Southern Chuan Fa and Okinawan di/ti. Even with these commonalities the styles of Chuan Fa that were ingrained in Shuri Te and Naha Te were different.
If you watch Uechi or Goju kata you can see a striking difference amongst technique, speed, execution and delivery. Goju kata for example tend to focus on some atemi and a lot of chin-na. Open hand strikes/postures are more prevalent in the Naha Te traditions especially with the newest variant, Uechi Ryu/Pangai Noon. The motions tend to be softer and slower, more deliberate. Although classified as internal, the techniques are often forced and strained, and a reliance on power and muscle versus speed is seen.
In contrast the kata of Matsumura's Shuri Te emphasizes a lot of atemi and some chin-na. The quickness and overall functional speed of delivery is also a dominant feature. Remember that in the equation for force velocity (speed) is twice as importnat than mass. Also, striking versus grappling makes more sense in a self-preservation or protection art, but grappling and controls are also very important. Nowadays with the legality involved with breaking jaws or striking necks, this may not be so true. That's why you'll see most bouncers and bodyguards learn to subdue the antagonist, rather than break his face open.
Too bad many Shuri Te derived styles have forgotten the importance of tuite/chin-na, though.
I would also point out that Goju and Uechi forms have a strong Tiger, Tiger/Crane or Dragon Boxing influence. Shorin forms have more of a Southern Shaolin Chuan Fa flavor to them. It's not overwhelming but it is salient.
So let's look at the three influences on Matsumura's Sui-Di.
First there's Okinawan Ti which Sokon was adept at before leaving to train in Fukien province with the Shaolin/White Crane masters Ason and Iwah. Ti makes use of the traditional closed fist punch. I would even say that the 3/4 "twist" variety and the traditional standing guard which is remarkably similar to the bare-knuckle boxing punch, comes from the art of Ti. I would classify Ti as an indigenous fighting form with influences from China, the Philippines maybe Indonesia or even Burma or Thailand, but predominantly it is a native fighting tradition unique to the Ryukyu Islands.
Also a facet of ti tegumi (wrestling) practiced by the young men on Okinawa influenced Sui-di, but as more of a physical conditioning art and local sport than in Machimura's fighting philosophy.
I think the atemi aspects of ti were more important in developing all karate. Still even Funakoshi explains the merits of being a good wrestler at a young age, and most Okinawan men of good health probably were also good grapplers. With the surge of MMAs theory and competition this has become quite apparent. The thing is real fighters have ALWAYS known this.
Southern Shaolin Chuan Fa has some similarities to most Shuri-Te derived karate. Many Shifu will say this but in a disparaging way comparing this karate to "beginners" Shaolin. They are sorely wrong. What's present in many Shorin Ryuha, it's offspring and cousins is the use of linear technique and low kicks. In systems like Shorinkan use of heel-to-toe stepping is seen in kata execution and general locomotion, this is a key feature of Shaolin too.
Also present are many chin-na techs that are directly from the chin-na seen in Shaolin Ssu. Supplementary and stregthening exercises, kote-ate, tai atari, kotekitai, whatever you want to call it are also of Chinese origin, although there's no doubt that the Okinawan had their own set of exercises. Even the use of the Makiwara is seen in Chuan Fa.
So what aspect of Sui-Di made it a good multiple opponent, self-preservation and protection art?
I would have to say that a significant but more minor influence was Shaolin, and the major influence was from the Satsuma Clan's fighting style called Jigen Ryu Kenjutsu. Kenjutsu is a war science. It's based on fighting on the battlefield or on protecting your superiors from harm. In sword fighting you can't choose how many opponents you wish to fight. You may fight one, but odds are you'll have to negotiate and attack swiftly, destroying everything and all comers in your vicinity, with or without weapons.
Matsumura Seito's "fighting" stance is a classic fencing stance albeit shortened, and mimics the common fencing on-guard position seen even in European sword arts.
The use of forward momentum instead of just rising and falling is also a feature of sword fighting. Change-body and the use of ball-of-the-foot stepping is also from Jigen Ryu. The tai- and ashi-sabaki afforded one using ball-of-the-foot versus heel pivoting is much greater and quicker.
So although everyone claims all karate is the same or teaches the same lessons, if you have any knowledge of its evolution you would know that this statement was untrue. Matsumura wasn't hocking medicine or trying to perform strongman feats in order to increase his fighting reputation.
He was dealing with life and death- his, his family's and his King's (King's family). He didn't just kind of know something, and then decided "oh that's quaint, let me move on now and see what other techniques I can get the gist of and then I'll make my own MA". The stories of the many encounters he had (contrary to what folks like Shoshin Nagamine have written) are legendary. His mind and his skills were exmplary, second to none in his time. That includes the other "toudi" masters.
Unlike Higashionna or Uechi he was a master of Shaolin (some say 15 years or more of study) as well as Toudi under "Toudi" Sakugawa. Those other two went to China for a few years, studied a little bit of Chuan Fa from Ru Ru Ko and Wai Xin Xiang, added their knowledge of ti to it then came up with the fisherman or farmer's art known as Naha Te.
They had no true skill in Kenjutsu, whereas Sokon was a Shihan in it, and this is very apparent from the Naha te forms. They still retain that Chinese flavor to them. Whereas Matsumura Seito and Motobu Ryu (not to be confused with Motobu-Ha Shito) also have some soft, fluid Chinese feel to them, the evidence that JuJutsu or Kenjutsu is ingrained in them is quite apparent.
The grappling you see in Shuri Te is chin-na, tuite and aikijujutsu combined. The grappling you see in Goju is chin-na, tuite and now judo and aikido influenced.
So if the author of that book you read feels that the pre-Matsumura Toudi probably was different I'd have to say he's probably right. Matsumura was the first recognized MMA guy in opinion. From weapons to toe kicks, to strangulations. There is a reason that Shuri Te in whatever form it now takes has gone on to conquer the karate world, and spawned everything from Ishimine Ryu to Tae Bo! Even Mas Oyama's
Kyokushinkai borrowed heavily from his Shotokan training. No matter how diluted it gets Matsumura's prowess and greatness see it through. Now Tiger Schulman is a quadrillionaire and he has an obscure Okinawan father of karate to thank.
With all that aside the original intent of toudi is not seen in most cases. First of all the Naha Te traditions had a totally different purpose than Shuri Te. The intent of modern karate mirrors that intent (Naha Te's) much more closely, even if it's a Shuri Te derivative.
In order to understand something more indepth you have to delve. If you want to be a lawyer you have to go to an accredited school where other lawyers and scholars who have superior law knowledge will teach you. If you want to know the original intent of Shuri Te derived styles you have to search closer to the source. You have to go where the knowledge is.
Understanding Machimura Sokon means to know a master who learned from masters, took the concepts without unnecessarily changing them, amalgamating them so that everything was complimentary not contradictory and finally formulating after a lifetime of diligent training an art from an obscure island nation in East Asia that somehow spread across the globe. Freaking AMAZING!!!
Dillman will never do that or be that. Greats like Gogen Yamaguchi can't say that. Can we truly understand just how great the progenitors of toudi/karate really were? Even Funakoshi had to learn these things before he could pass on his form of "empty-hand" combat.
I have the utmost reverence for Matsumura and his teachings. I don't need to change anything about his karate, I'm just not that good. Now you know why I post what I post, and get mad at what I get mad at. None of us on here will ever be as great as he was, whether it's as a scholar, warrior or gentlemen.
Umuiri is our goal.
"...Enrich the Bujutsu of Budo, adapt to change and keep practicing with this note in mind."
Writing frankly at this occasion
5/3/c.1880 Sokon Matsumura
to brother Kuwae Ryosei
Originally posted by Shonuff:
Multi, from the sound of your post am I right in saying that you agree with Bruce Claytons analysis of the greater intent behind Matsumura's Karate?
Is there any way we can be certain that the chinese MA teachers taught accurately and in complete detail to outsiders such as the Okinawans who sought their tutelage? It seems unlikely to me given the closed door reputation of chinese MA's and the heavy differences between the Karate styles and chinese styles would seem to bare that out.
Another concept of pre Matsumura Karate is night fighting. It took me a while to figure out what was meant by this, night without street lights is pitch black. Fighting in these conditions is all about chi-sau (sticky hands) grappling/manipulation and evasion in case of weapons. Its surmised that these techniques were not required for bodygaurd duties and so were phased out of Matsumura's Karate. Kusanku was said to have originally been for this purpose.
Those Okinawans who were fluent in Mandarin or Cantonese, the Chinese classics, calligraphy and culture would be given the same respect as a Chinese man. It's said that Yonamine Chiru, Sokon's wife, was the granddaughter of Ko Sho Kun (Kusanku) who was a Chinese attache. The Chinese were not as stand-offish towards other asian cultures as the Japanese were. There are many examples of mainlanders either studying in China (Takuan Soho comes to mind), being of half-heritage or being schooled in Japan. Chen Gempin, the supposed forefather of modern JJJ, is a perfect example of this.
The Okinawans paid tribute to the Chinese even after the subsequent invasion of Okinawan by the Satsuma Clan. Tribute ships would carry Chinese goods and emissaries back and forth between the two countries. The Ryukyukan, a temporary home away from home built on China was still in operation up until the 1940s. The Chinese had no supremacy issues with the Okinawans, Pilipinos, Malaysians or Koreans.
So I do feel that there were a few Okinawans, especially the learned ones or royalty like Matsumura and the Motobu family, who went there and learned Chinese MAs in its entirety, just like they did with other aspects of Chinese culture. The differences you see between Kung Fu and Okinawan Karate are from other influences. Chuan fa was one of the many influences (as I detailed previously) on Shuri Te.
As for night fighting, Matsumura didn't take these techs out. Why didn't you learn this before getting your BB? If you do a good version of Patsai/PaiSai/Passai Sho and Dai, you'll notice that the final movement is a grappling tech sometimes called "searching" or "sensing" hands. This was made for in-close or night fighting. So I think that the author is speaking from a karate-do or Shotokan perspective. Machimura would have use for night-fighting techs and they are still there in many kata.
CVV,
What proof is there that these Naha men were Peichin or higher? What businesses besides medicine hawking did they partake in? Now Gokenki was a tea merchant, but he was Chinese and taught Chuan Fa on Okinawa. But what royal or aristocratic title did Higashionna or Miyagi have? I was always told that Higashionna was a sailor. How about Kanbun Uechi? You're right, I don't know everything about Naha Te but I do know some things.
So what was the purpose of Naha Te, and why did they learn heel-toe stepping for boat fighting, if they didn't protect the boats as military officers or even peace-keepers? Could it be that they were fishermen or common swabbies?
By the way we do the same stepping (crescent stepping or recentering) in Matsumura Seito and Shorinkan-Kobayashi Ryu. Anyway thanks for the lesson. I'd like to learn more.
Bryan,
I've been thinking on your comments regarding Matsumura Sensei for several days.
If I understand your thoughts about Matsumura as originator of your system, but your contention that you can not ever be as great as he was. Would that not be the same as thinking of Harvey or Pasteur as the greatest Doctor and you could never exceed what they accomplished?
Prime sources of change or development are/were incredible beings. Does that preclude your ability to reach beyond their accomplishments? Or is it only Matsumura accomplished the true art?
Personally I don't see such limitations and think their lives should be challenges to all of us to work to exceed where they have been. Regardless of whether we accomplish that or not.
Why do you think so many who trained with Matsumura changed things, I'm just soliciting an opinion, I truly don't understand why?
Did he only share a public version of his art, and not care how they got it, keeping the good stuff to himself and his 'family'? Sure times are different today, but if this was the case was he a good instructor, or was he taking them for a ride as he kept the true art to himself?
Was he a poor instructor and didn't know how to get the right stuff across to those students? In turn they felt they had license to do what they wished?
Was he a great instructor and they were bad students who didn't get it, or get enough of the right stuff, or did they have bad memories and forget and substitute freely?
Or was there some other reason for the variance that arose?
Could the inner teachings he shared prove the important part and the external ones, like how a move in a kata is performed, mean very little?
Was he a master of Shaolin, I wasn't aware of that?
I always thought real Shaolin was only for those who shaved their heads, foreswore eating flesh and spent most of the day meditating on the Buddah, with free time for survival maintenance and some MA training. The temple arts were extremely complex so nobody could have completely known more than a fraction of them.
Or was he perhaps a master of a Shaolin derivative art? If so is the term master of shaolin truly descriptive? Does the 15 years training you mention make one a master?
I don't doubt skill will come in such a time, it's just I'm curious what master means?
Was the art he studied the strongest of the Chinese arts, or was it the combination of that art(s) and his other training that accomplished his own art?
I only question this because I've not met anyone that personally I think truly mastered anything. Outside of being a label too, far too commonly applied today, I have a difficult time knowing what standard should be used to assume mastery.
I agree I've met super accomplished technicians and instructors, but mastery is something I doubt exists, except as a word. Probably personal bias on my part, but still a question of definitions I'm curious about.
I'm also curious about the manner in which you describe Shuri Te grappling as opposed to Goju grappling.
Shuri Te as a combination of chin-na, tuite and aikijutsu.
Chin-na I know, I've practiced a bit, mostly through Ying Jow Pai and some sourced through Dr. Yang Jwing-Ming. Almost every Chinese system contains chin-na, but with great differences as in anything else. So some Chinese Chin-na, then shome tuite thrown in.
And unless I'm mistaken tuite was a term created by Oyata for Americans, and didn't have any Okinawan derivation. Is this a common use term to suggest grappling of Okinawan origin, such as from ti sources like Motobu-ryu? Then the mention of aikijutsu is most curious.
I've seen suggestion that somehow aikijutsu was an influence of ti, is this your issue, or is it a derivative of the Jingen Ryu Kenjutsu. The reason I'm questioning this is it is hidiously difficult to find knowledgable aikijutsu sources. Almost all the books are something other than what their title claims. Daito-Ryu Aiki-jutsu is the only Japanese Aiki-jutsu I'm aware of.
Outside of Christopher Caille (of FightingArts.com) and one other gentleman I know, I know no other practitioners. I don't know much direct about aiki-jutsu, except as the Aiki Journal research has shown, it is extremely complex. For example Aiki Journal did an interview in Japan, where it was theorized to learn the entire system would be a 30 year journey, as it was so complex, similar to my friends 30 year journey to learn Northern Eagle Claw.
Was Daito Ryu taught in Japan or in Matsumura's studies. Did he receive signigicant instruction or some of it, such as Usheiba had (who did have Daito Ryu teaching credentials) who founder Aikido.
Part of my questioning is you contrast these arts to the grappling techniques of Goju, claiming Chin-Na, tuite and aikido like sources.
How is aikido different from aikijutsu, unless one is talking about complete transmission?
For example I've studied a little aikido, and my instructors approach to the arm bar is to interrupt a swinging arm by using the full body application of the arm bar to plant the attackers face in the ground. As one example I would apply a section of Isshinryu's SunNuSu kata (from Kyan's Patsai) using the same arm bar application, they strike and I put their face into the ground. Is this use of aikido different from aiki-jutsu?
I'm sorry if my questions are so detailed. You have most generously shared information I haven't seen before and these are the questions I have about them, and of course so many other arts.
Thank you for your sharing,
Victor
Was Machimura a true master of Shaolin Chuan Shu? Meaning, was he a monk who became an abbott eventually running a temple? No. Had he mastered those things that he learned under Iwah (and others in China) enough to enhance his own MAs knowledge considerably? Yes. His life followed bun bu ryu, the way of the pen and combat. His livelihood depended upon those things which would increase his abilities as head palace guard for three Okinawan kings. If you research long enough you'll find that his wife, Yonamine Chiru, was the granddaughter of Ko Sho Kun (Kusanku), who was a Chinese military attache. He therefore had a legit Chinese connection.
I know for a fact that he taught the majority of his students, and the list is looong, in an individualized way. That's why you get different interpretations of kata movements and even fist formation between his students. Itosu was known for his almost superhuman grip, squat build and exceptional strength and you can see this in Chibana-Ha derived Shuri Te. Chan Migwa, Chotoku Kyan, was known for his leaping ability and leg flexibility and you'll see this in those arts descended from him. The differences go on and on. The sign of any good teacher is their ability to make what they do seem easy and personalize the message or lesson for the pupil(s). Matsumura definitely did that. I know I'll never be a master at Sui-di like he was or even Lindsey is.
The truth is that we may never know if Hohan Soken was truly related to Sokon Matsumura, or if Nabe really existed. Regardless the Sui-Di from Hohan Soken looks more "Chinese" and like bare-knuckle boxing than the other Shorin Ryuha. This is because he left Okinawa in the 1920s and didn't return until the 1950s. Whoever he learned Shuri Te from, it was a much older and maybe some would argue less refined form of Shorin, closer to the original intent of the art.
As for masters and mastery, there have been quite a few in various disciplines throughout time. Isaac Newton, Rembrandt, Imhotep, Rachmaninoff, Mozart, Shakespeare, Einstein, Matsumura, Higashionna, Helio Gracie and the list goes on and on. Mastery is not common because most of us are just common, but it does happen. I doubt any of you guys have heard of him and you would probably say that mastering Hip Hop DJing (called "Turntablism") means diddly, but I know a DJ ("Turntablist") Q-Bert who, like Jimi Hendrix did with the electric guitar, has definitely mastered the "wheels of steel".
When I use the term tuite, I mean to say "Ti", like that taught in the MA Motobu Udunte (Motobu Ryu). Tuite predated Oyata even if that actual term didn't. "A rose by any other name..." Composed of chin-na from Shaolin sources like Shouting Crane, Feeding Crane and other chuan fa, it also includes elements of Satsuma grappling from Jigen Ryu Kenjutsu, and is very similar to aikijujutsu. As you know Roy Suenaka, a high ranking Matsumura Seito stylist under Soken, is also a very accomplished Daito Ryu practitioner and teacher. No doubt he would tell you the same.
Rick James look-a-like aka. Shonuff!:
I've been told that the side to side stepping seen in Naihanchi was patterned after the way the Chinese Emperor's guards would move in order to protect him. They would box him in and measure their steps precisely so as to not step on the fellow next to them. Do I believe this? Ummm, I dunno, but it is interesting to think about.
Do we do Naihanchi Sandan? Yes, just as many Seito practitioners learn Ananku, Wansu, Pinan 3-5, but it is supplementary and not really required for grading in a true Matsumura Seito dojo.
Anyway, you have some very valid and tough questions, and I don't know all the answers but hope this helped a little.
Originally posted by Shonuff:
If your happy that the variations in Shuri te Karate descends from Matsumura's teaching, why are you convinced that MS is the truest style? Could it not be yet another variation based on the attributes of the student?
Because Soken Hohan was in Argentina when the whole Japanization, commercialization thing jumped off. When he returned he saw that Shuri Te was now Shorin Ryu and that it had changed. Other than the nomenclture Soken changed very little of his Sui-di. That's why. I think I said that earlier though.
Does it make sense? If not do some research for yourself. Have you ever experienced real MS first hand? If not then you really should wait to comment. I can guarantee you I've seen almost every other Shorin variant, Japanese Okinawan or otherwise.
Look I don't say things just to piss people off. I say them because that's what I know, and that's it. I'm not saying MS is the best only the truest old-form that I have experienced (Shuri Te).
You guys will figure this out as you get older and allow yourself to experience more. I never said it was better than any style, just truer to its origins than most Shuri Te styles.
Now go spar or something or do your Bassai forms. Whatever you want to be true is in this land of make-believe, kiddos.
Originally posted by Shonuff:
*laughing at you*
You seriously cannot see the conde
scnsction in your words???
Anyway, thanks for your responses this has been quite an informative thread. Is there anything else us "kiddo's" should know about Masumuras intentions? Any kata meanings that us non MS or Shuri-te Karateka comonly get wrong?
I was curious about Wansu, I've only ever seen Shotokan and Isshinryu versions. From the shotokan I get the impression the kata is centred around changing direction of combat energies i.e. pushing and pulling/rising and falling...?
Wansu has all those things and some good throws, too. "Spearing the ball" is a salient technique learned in this kata. It is sometimes called the "dumping boy form".
From what I've been told, Matsumura's intentions were to teach good young men decent fighting skills. He selected only one of these, Nabe Matsumura, to carry on the "hands" of his teachings. He taught Nabe Suidi and others learned what would later be called Shorin Ryu. The Nabe version was the family self-protection style and all the others learned the village style which lacked certain elements like the intricacies seen in the (family) form, Hakutsuru.
Chibana wanted to keep his Shorin as intact as possible, but Itosu had already put his stamp on it, wso how intact was it? The same goes for Kyan. Nagamine really did a more eclectic style of Shorin based a lot on Choki Motobu's toudijutsu and Tomari Te. The Okinawan Prefecture even classifies it as Tomari Te.
Shotokan as Funakoshi knew it and first taught it was very similar to Chibana O'Sensei's Shorin, but he was also influenced by Shorei (Goju) and his senior students also added certain Northern Chuan Fa elements like the roundhouse kick. Funakoshi was also following Itosu's lead, in that he wanted to formulate a karate style that everyone could practice and that put less emphasis on real fighting.
I would say that Matsumura Seito often looks more like Isshin Ryu than the other Shorin Ryuha, but with more bend in the knees. No kicks are ever above the waist and there are no roundhouse kicks. It's almost all hands. The ti is wicked and doesn't allow breakfalls. When you throw someone you try to rip their throat out or tear their limb out of the socket. The influence of Feeding Crane can be seen in the low-line ricocheting kick/sweep/trip waza, and the use of the big toe kick is abundant.
Also apparent are a lot of thumbing techs or thumb strikes to certain points on the throat, arms and other sensitive targets. Getting a rear corner and change-body as well as body-change (not the same) are utilized. Elbow strikes are used a lot. "Mud-stepping" and whip-kicks are also important features. We use recentering steps, suri-ashi, or crescent stepping---whatever you want to call it. Limb destructions where you actually attack the forearm at the radial and proximal interosseus nerve are a normal feature. We definitely like hard blocks and also double-bone blocks.
Block-strike is always simultaneous, there are no chudan uke, pause, gyakuzuki waza in drills. NONE. When performing kihon drills there is no chambering of the off hand. The rear hand in in a guard position to parry strikes or aid in blocking. You often block-strike using both hands.
I can't detail everything here. It would take too long. Trust me it's different from what you do, what Kobayashi does, Shorinji Ryu, Sukunaihayashi, Seibukan, Shito, Shotokan or whoever. It is the last of its kind and very few folks really know how to do it, even the ones who claim they do.
Hope this helps and sorry for the condescending words.
Bryan,
Thank you for your response to my earlier questions.
Perhaps I am sensitive about the use of terms on some issues (such as Shaolin Master or Tuite) but clearly communicating is important to the ongoing future development of the arts.
I recognize the use of the term Shaolin Master as respect for Matsumura/Machimura’s studies. I also understand the way you’re using Tuite, but this one gets a little stickier to me. If you were referencing Ti or Motobu Udunte I can understand the linkage, even if I can’t readily see those arts. It’s just the term tuite was created specifically by Oyata Sensei to try and communicate what he was teaching to a new audience, and because other have clearly absconded the use of those terms, I understand he’s dropped many of them from what he teaches today. I’m unsure if he replaced them or is using another answer. Oyata’s arts may or may not be similar to earlier Ti.
Whether one practices the art or not, out of respect for his original sharing, it is only correct not to use his terms outside of his context. Otherwise we would be like those who grab what they want for their own purposes.
As the arts grew in this country, from no historical context, many including myself, inappropriately grabbed terms and concepts thinking they were all alike. Such as Oyama’s use of Ibuki breathing from his texts, and in turn using it to describe our arts Sanchin, which was not communicated with those terms. In reality they may mean the same thing, but IMVHO it is incorrect to just grab and use concepts out of context.
After much research the past few years I’ve been working very hard to attribute what I teach to where I got it and not add imports that are not part of the tradition. Of course I span a few traditions but I do my best that my students understand where their studies originated.
Course that’s today. As you’ve indicated no one can be sure where Soken’s arts actually originated, but they are clearly earlier versions of the arts. Perhaps you are correct they are more effective, perhaps you are not.
Whatever Matsumura shared influenced those individuals lives to remain in the art, and their collective experience moved their arts along, just as Matsumura moved his own training forward. There is no field of knowledge that would blithely accept only the old way is best. That would be the equivalent of swimmers using the same training of Gold Medalist Johnny Weissmeuller for today’s swimmers. He played Tarzan in the movies, and today junior high school girls beat is best times with no effort. What is sufficient for one era may or may not be sufficient for others.
No doubt Soken’s training was different from others. I thank you for beginning this discussion a while ago, it’s caused me to take a look at Matsumura Seito, from my library of material. I would not have done so otherwise, other issues of focus.
But as you’ve described it, I have a hard time accepting it and it alone is the effective answer. Change happened. Soken left Okinawa in the Depression (as did many others) and made his way for decades in South America. There he was involved in sharing and studying in the Okinawan community. Who can say who influenced whom, of course their arts were linked to the older practices too.
In Okinawa some tried to mainstream in the Japanese community. They began using karate for secondary school physical education. They shared with Japan, but did not have the foresight to keep Okinawa in control of that sharing, crafting a new variation on the arts. But they also laid a ground work that would allow the arts to be shared in the future. And they did something more important, the actually documented and shared some of their teachings. The emerging Shotokan stylist can clearly see how their art changed over the decades. Others shared material about how the arts could be used, in detail you cannot find today (as in Mutsu’s 1933 Ryukyu Kempo). Those individuals cared enough to do something more important, create a time binding that would last. For god or for bad.
Sure the times, the depression, the lack of work may have contributed to their trying to make some money, but Funakoshi sweated for zip for quite some time before there was any reward, such as it was. I think the desire to mainstream Okinawa within Japan, was a larger goal. They didn’t want to be the poor cousins they actually were.
Is that less honorable than moving elsewhere to live? Hard question, no easy answers then or now.
Outside of what happened, It is questionable how much the Japan experience shaped what happened in Okinawa till the 1950’s.
So you have the war, people surviving the very hard way. Many dying and with arts undocumented, passed only personally things had to change. Great depression was the result of war and occupation. Some used the chance to teach for money to survive. This is rampant commercialism? And in turn they often paid with students leaving, not wanting to associate with those who killed their families.
Course in the 50’s other changes happened. Uniforms, rank awarding, organizations developing all occurred. Most of the prior instructors who may have shaped things differently were gone, so the arts adapted to the times. Soken awarded rank, with about the same standard as others (ie Suneka’s description of his awards).
And some things were vastly different. Individuals such as Shimabuku Tatuso did the unthinkable, they crafted a way to share the Okinawa experience world wide. For good or for bad, those experiments took and the world wide karate boom began and continues.
Time seems to show the arts have always changed.
I note with interest your comment that “I would say that Matsumura Seito often looks more like Isshin Ryu than the other Shorin Ryuha, but with more bend in the knees.”
When I first saw Kise in the early 80’s I saw the resemblance to Isshinryu in his Kusanku. Take that comment with your comment “. Whoever he learned Shuri Te from, it was a much older and maybe some would argue less refined form of Shorin, closer to the original intent of the art. “
I can accept that definition of Soken’s art, it is identical with comments from a friend in South America describing it too.
The really interesting thing is, apart from your observations, I’ve seen other Shorin people indict Isshinryu because they were of the Opinion Shimabuku got rid of the more complicated stuff, creating a simpler version of Shorin training. Go figure.
I find your explanation of your art fascinating, I thank you for this description. It’s a shame I can’t readily share the similarities to my own studies and those shared with me by various instructors.
Most particularly the simultaneous block/strike. From my Shotokan training I experienced a direct parallel to this. The instructors teachings to create more explosive response with almost identical intent as you describe. It took me a long hard look to determine that was not the shape of the art I was interested in.
It is a fine answer, but there are other effective answers too. This is why it is terribly difficult to proclaim any one answer as the right one. True you can indict those who aren’t effective at their art as being incomplete, but that does not preclude those who take the same answer and arrive at a different solution.
What you’re describing is different tactical choices. Simultaneous block/strike is fine, but not necessarily better than other skilled responses, and in fact if one knows what your response will be, is then an exercise in skill and tactics to overcome same.
The total shape you’ve shared of your MS training sounds very good and deep. Thank you for sharing so freely.
Victor Smith
Bushi no te isshinryu
The connection between Matsumura Seito Karatejutsu and Okinawan Kenpo is strong. Yuichi Kuda, a senior student of Soken was also a senior student of Shigeru Nakamura. He synthesized the two arts and formed Matsumura Seito (Shorin Ryu) Kenpo. The kata from this lineage have more Seito characteristics than Kenpo ones, but the stances can be longer and a bit wider. They also engage in Bogu sparring. I like some of it and other aspects of it not so much. I never learned the Kenpo variety but my sensei will sometimes show the differences between the kenpo and the karatejutsu.
My current Sensei, Ron Lindsey, was a senior student of Yuichi Kuda. He was president of his organization and Yuichi Kuda himself said that the day would come when old-style Okinawan karate would be perpetuated by the American students who learned from the likes of Kuda, Kise, Soken and others. He also stated that the only people he felt were qualified to teach his brand of Matsumura Seito were Ron Lindsey, Greg Ohl and Charles Tatum.
Ron Lindsey was also a senior student of Kise's. He was president of Kenshinkan for some years. Then there was a falling out between his sensei and himself. Kise was giving out rank for things like a guy getting him some lunch, and made some monetary accusations that were unfounded and outright lies (towards Lindsey who is very humble and lives meagerly), so the board of directors voted to kick Kise out of his own organization! Sounds crazy huh? Anyway, that takes nothing away form the fact that everyone knows Lindsey since the day he began Shorin Ryu was pretty much a real fighter and undefeated in many bouts even as a mudansha versus yudansha, or that Kise can still kick practically everyone's butt although he doesn't teach his students the way he was taught (anymore).
I go where the real is. I trained in a real good system in the Philippines, Shorin Ryu Shorinkan under Ulysses Aquino, and it took me thirteen years to find a good teacher in the USA. I travel 2 hours to train with him, usually twice a month for about 7 hours per session, usually privates. It's worth it. This style of karate is gonna die if good folks don't perpetuate it. I love how our kata look. There are so many nuances left out just in the performiance of Naihanchi kata in other styles. We kept all those little subtleties and emphasize proper structure (Structural qi), balance and a lot of 45 degree angles. We use a lot of kyushojutsu with the thumb as a weapon. Pain and cranking things at odd angles help out with the "tuite" (a term we can use because there are kenpo aspects to our grappling).
If you want to know how the kata look, I'd say that they look more relaxed, natural, fast in a smart "quick" way, varied rhythm, very well rooted, knees always bent (unless you do the Kenpo variety), with use of moderate koshi and smart physics to accomplish strikes. Lots of whip kicks, which are not snap kicks (mae geri keage), but more akin to low Thai kicks that follow through with relaxed speed and return just as fast. No kicks are ever above the waist, although my Shorinkan training has left me with many in my repertoire, especially roundhouses which are nonexistent in Matsumura Seito. The fist is held at 45 degrees, and the elbows brush the side (elbows down).
I wouldn't say it necessarily looks like a 70 year old doing kata. It looks more 50/50 like all karate claims to be. I feel from what I've seen from other Shorin Ryuha that this is how karate use to be before the emphasis on attracting students and fighting in the ring or entering tournaments was emphasized. With time the power in your waza increases, due to the fact that you get away from "constipated" karate. It's almost all punching and hand strikes, and even Soken's back-kick is done by turning around using change-body and whipping out a low front whip kick with the big toe-tip, or the side of the foot
If you've ever seen Feeding Crane it does have a lot of similarities to it. Of course their is the Ti and Jigen Ryu influence. Those are very apparent too. I thought I could do karate with my little bit of Shorinkan training, but now I understand what it's like to be less forceful and more natural in my postures. For the first time ever if I were to fight I wouldn't look like a broke kickboxer with some half-assed judo principles thrown in. I'd look like a karate man using very barbaric fighting techs. Our motto isn't "Karet ni sente nashi", it's "Sen no sen". Once you have an inkling strike first and don't stop til it's done.
I would say it's complex in its simplicity, most of all. You learn why lead leg and lead hand techs make sense and work for real fighting. You get away from that remedial karate stuff, like middle block- reverse punch-roundhouse kick to the head. You learn how to use effective hard block-strikes by parrying at the same time with your spare block. You learn how to move and strike simultanously or block-strike simultaneously. Most of all you learn a multitude of combinations and the real meaning behind "continuous fist fighting".
The 2-person drills are phenomenal and make jiyu kumite look like patty-cakes. It's koteate, sparring, distance training, stance training, change-body training and pain acclimation all rolled into one, and it teaches you how to fight with your karate waza.
The stylist does help make a style effective, but the style can also help the stylist be more effective by having more sound techs based on real, not perceived, h2h combat. I know karate. I've seen mulitple representations of all of them both here and abroad. Most of it is a pale representation, of a diluted form of an art that never was. It's good for making money and sometimes decent citizens, but not for self-preservation. That's just the truth.
With the slow demise of old style karate, karate will become more and more unlike itself and more and more like a caricature of "empty hand". My belt uses the kanji to denote "tang hand" versus the kara for "empty". Funakoshi wasn't wrong to name modern Toudi this. It really has become a "hope" art. I'm here to try and stop it, but like the Elephant Bird I doubt me and the few other "adept" or "not-so-adept" can.
No comments:
Post a Comment