.jpg)
At a time when
the practice of Ryukyu kobudo was at it’s lowest, Taira Shinken (1897-1970)
brought the fragmented and obscure weapons system of the Ryukyus to a place of
prominence in the world of Okinawa Budo.
During his decades of study, Taira traveled extensively throughout
Okinawa and Japan, learning and mastering the use of many of the old weapons
traditions; some of which had been neglected for decades and often only had a
few practitioners remaining. His
detailed study of the arts also moved to dissecting many of the old Okinawa
dance forms that were both karate-do and kobudo based that were practiced in
many of the small remote villages scattered throughout Okinawa ((Estrada, 1978;
McKenna, 1999).
Although he was
primarily remembered as a kobudo genius, Taira Shinken also devoted a large
part of his life to karate-do as well, having studied extensively under
Funakoshi Gichin (Shotokan), Yabiku Moden (Shorin-ryu), and Mabuni Kenwa
(Shito-ryu). His time spent on the
Japanese mainland also brought him into contact with such notables as; Fujita
Sieiko (Nanbansato-ryu Kempo / Koga-ryu Ninjutsu), and Konishi Yasuhiro (Shindo
Jinen Ryu) and Motobu Choki (Shorin-ryu).
After his return to Okinawa from the Japanese mainland in 1940, Taira
often frequented the company of many of Okinawa Karate-do’s leading authorities
including; Higa Seiko (Goju-ryu), Higa Yuuchoku (Shorin-ryu), Uechi Kanei
(Uechi-ryu), Shimabuku Tatsuo (Isshin-ryu) and Hohan Soken (Matsumura Seito
Shorin-ryu).
At the time of
his death in 1970, he had formally transmitted his accumulated years of
knowledge and training to his most senior students Akamine Eisuke (Okinawa) and
Inoue Motokatsu (Japan). In the case of
Akamine Eisuke, not only did he inherit Taira Shinken’s weapons knowledge, but
also his years of training in shotokan karate-do (Table 1). However, as large and as significant as this
body of knowledge was, Taira was rumored to have mastered over 500 kata; a
mixture of both karate and kobudo forms (Estrada, 1978).
If indeed Taira
Shinken did accumulate such a massive body of knowledge of the fighting arts of
the Ryukyus, what specifically did he know?
Furthermore, if it was so extensive, why did he not teach all of it to
his students?
Ryukyu Kobudo
.jpg)
It is well
documented that Taira gained his first introduction to the weapons tradition of
the Ryukyus through his paternal grand father, Kanegawa Gibu, who taught him
the use of the double sickles (nicho gama), weighted chain (suruchin), Tekko
(knuckle duster) as well as the shield and short spear (rochin and tinbe)
(Ryukyu Kobudo Shinko Kai, 1977; Nakamoto, 1983).
At the age of
25, Taira began to study shotokan karate-do under Funakoshi Gichin in September
of 1922. It was probably under Funakoshi
Gichin’s influence and that of his son, Yoshitaka (Gigo), that Taira’s interest
in Ryukyu kobudo grew (Zalewski, 1998).
It has been substantiated that Funakoshi Yoshitaka knew and practiced four
bo-jutsu kata: Shushi no kon; Sakugawa no kon; Shirotaru no kon and Matsukaze
no kon (most likely the creation of Gigo) (McMahon, 1999). It is also highly probable that Funakoshi and
his son were familiar with other bo kata such as Tenryu no kon and Sunakake no
kon, in addition to sai-jutsu since Funakoshi had studied Aragaki-ryu under
Aragaki Seisho (Kamadeunchu) (1840-1918), an expert in the use of both bo
(staff) and sai (metal truncheon), during his days in Okinawa (Nakamoto,
1983). Therefore, it is quite
conceivable that Taira would have been exposed to many of the kata of
Aragaki-ryu kobudo given his eight years of study under Funakoshi. In fact Taira is believed to have first
learned the use of the sai and bo from Funakoshi, who taught him the kata
Tsukenshitahaku no sai and Tenryu no kon (Zalewski, 1998). Interestingly in later years, Taira Shinken
did not include Tenryu no kon or Matsukaze no kon as part of his Ryukyu Kobudo
Hozon Shinko Kai syllabus (Table 2).
By 1929 Taira's
had begun studying Ryukyu kobudo on a formal basis under Yabiku Moden
(1878-1941) (Bishop, 1989, 1996; Nakamoto, 1983; Ryukyu Kobudo Hozon Shinko
Kai, 1977). Taira studied for well over
three years under Yabiku Moden until he moved to Ikahononsen city in Gunma
prefecture to teach karate and kobudo in 1932.
(Nakamoto, 1983; Ryukyu Kobudo Hozon Shinko Kai, 1977). Yabiku Moden had studied Ryukyu Kobujutsu
extensively under several teachers including Tawada Shimboku (sai-jutsu), Kinjo
Saburo (sai-jutsu) and Chinen, Sanda (Yamane-ryu bo-jutsu) as well as from his
principle karate-do teacher, Itosu Yasutsune (Okinawa Hogen: Itosu Anko)
(Alexander, 1991; Bishop, 1989, 1996; Nakamoto, 1983). During those three years it is possible that
Taira would have gained insight into other weapons kata from Yabiku such as
Ufuchiku no sai; which Yabiku would have most likely learned from Kinjo (Table
3).
1934 saw Taira
Shinken invite Shito-ryu founder Mabuni Kenwa to his shotokan dojo in
Ikahononsen city to further his studies in kobudo and karate-do. Under the tutelage of Mabuni, Taira learned
many new kata and techniques (Nakamoto, 1983; Ryukyu Kobudo Hozon Shinko Kai,
1977). Mabuni Kenwa, like his
acquaintances Funakoshi Gichin and Yabiku Moden, had studied Aragaki-ryu
kobujutsu under Aragaki Kamadeunchu, bo-jutsu under Sueyoshi Jino and sai-jutsu
under Tawada Shimboku (Nakamoto, 1983).
Taira studied under Mabuni until his return to Okinawa in 1940; a total
of six years. Given this length of time,
it is quite possible that Taira may have been able to learn other weapons traditions
from Mabuni. Perhaps Shokyu no kon and
the Aragaki no sai of Aragaki-ryu.
In 1938 Taira
Shinken wrote a chapter on Ryukyu Kobudo demonstrating Shushi / Kongo no kon in
Nakasone Genwa’s “Karate-do Taikan” (Encyclopedia of Karate-do). In it Taira demonstrates Shushi / Kongo no
kon, but also states in the preface that “…there are several scores of kata
which have been passed down to us.....(pg.276)" He later goes on to list several bo kata as
well as indicating that there are several different versions for the same bo
kata on Okinawa including: Shushi no kon, Sakugawa no kon (3 versions),
Yonegawa no kon, Shirotaru no kon, Tsuken bo (3 versions), Sunakake no kon (3
versions), Teruya no kon, Choun no kon, Shichiyanaka no kon and Sesoko no kon.
Taira’s chapter
on bo-jutsu in Nakasone Genwa’s “Karate-do Taikan” is some of the first
indirect evidence that Taira Shinken possibly knew more weapons traditions than
he actually taught his students. First,
we find that several of the kata that Taira Shinken lists, Teruya no kon and
Sunakake no kon, are not included in the original Ryukyu Kobudo Hozon Shinko
Kai syllabus nor the syllabi of Taira’s students following his death in 1970
(Table 2). It may be argued that Taira
could have been simply listing only the names of individual bo kata. However it seems unlikely that Taira would
list the names of these bo kata if he was not indeed familiar with these weapon
traditions. In fact of the bo kata that
he lists, it has been documented that he learned all of them save Teruya no kon
and Sunakake no kon (Nakamoto, 1983; Ryukyu Kobudo Hozon Shinko Kai, 1977;
Taira, 1964). Therefore it seems highly
probable that he did know these bo kata yet did not teach these kata to his
students.
Examining the
other bo kata that are listed in Taira’s chapter in “Karate-do Taikan”, we find
Taira listing three versions for both Sakugawa no kon and Tsuken bo. Interestingly, among Taira’s direct students,
only the late Inoue Motokatsu taught three versions of Sakugawa no kon (sho/chu/dai);
while Taira’s other Okinawan students only taught two versions of the same kata
(sho / dai). Furthermore, only one
version of Tsuken bo is taught by Taira’s students. Therefore, it appears that Taira may have
held back some of his teaching.
What then does
this all point to? “Karate-do Taikan”
was published in 1938 when Taira was 40 years old and by this time he appears
to have been already familiar with several different versions of the same kata! It seems highly likely that in the remaining
32 years of his life, that he would continue his detailed study of Ryukyu
kobudo. And indeed he appears to have
done so. Taira is known to have learned
Argagaki-ryu sai and bo kata from Kamiya Jinsei (Ryukyu Kobudo Hozon Shinko
Kai, 1977; Nakamoto, 1983). This would
be Taira’s third exposure to Aragaki-ryu sai and bo techniques; his first two
coming from Funakoshi Gichin (Shotokan) and Mabuni Kenwa (Shito-ryu). This exposure to Aragaki-ryu for the third
time begs the question, was Taira familiar with other, less-known Aragaki-ryu
kata such as Shokyu no kon and Aragaki no sai?
However, there is no evidence to substantiate if he did or not.
Back on Okinawa,
Taira’s endless pursuit of Kobudo knowledge did not stop with Kamiya
Jinsei. In an interview with the late
Hohan Soken (Matsumura Seito Shorin-ryu) he relates, “I also teach bo, sai, tuifa, kama, nunchaku, kusarigama and suruchin.
My favorite weapons form is tsuken-bo (I
learned that from Kemesu Ushi) but in the old days it was the furi-gama or kusari-gama
(Estrada, 1978).” Hohan Soken also
states, “I knew Taira Shinken very well
before he died. I taught him some of my older forms” (Estrada, 1978). Therefore it seems highly likely that Taira
was familiar with Hohan Soken’s kobudo as well.
However it is unknown how many weapons and related kata Hohan Soken
taught Taira. Regardless, what ever kata
Taira learned from Hohan Soken, it would have added significantly to an already
vast knowledge of Ryukyu kobudo.
Finally, Taira’s
studies of Ryukyu kobudo were known to extend into analyzing many of the old
weapons festival dances demonstrated yearly in many of the remote villages of
Okinawa and Japan. This also can be
corroborated in Hohan Soken’s interview.
When the interviewer asks about the differences in some of the village
bo kata bearing the same name, Hohan Soken answers, “…village people would watch the other fancy city people practice their
ti or their methods of weaponry”. He
continues, “The city kata had a name...
and maybe their kata did not have a name. [Sic] They would name their kata after the city kata because they had a few
of the same movements.” Finally,
Hohan relates the following, “Some of
their [village] kata had five or
maybe ten movements. Taira, my friend, would go to the village and learn these
kata. He says that he learn 500 kata this way! …Some of these kata had only
three or maybe five movements. 500 kata, yes, now that is funny but he was a
history collector. He knew them but he
didn't understand them.”
.jpg)
Integrating Kobudo and Karate-do
Taira’s first real exposure to a standardized
combination of Karate-do and Kobudo came through his tutelage under Yabiku
Moden. Taira found that Yabiku had adjusted his karate-do to co-inside better
with the kobudo forms he taught; making it simpler and easier to instruct his
students. Taira is said to have initially found some difficulty in using the
long Shotokan stances he had learned while trying to learn kobudo, since the
original kobudo stances were quite high in comparison.
Taira struggled with this dilemma of incorporating his
kobudo knowledge with his background in shotokan for several years and by the
late 1930's he had shifted away from Shotokan and it’s emphasis on strength and
impact, and instead adopted a more circular and less intensive form of
karate-do similar to Yabiku Moden and Mabuni Kenwa. This can be readily seen in Mabuni
Kenwa’s 1938 publication of “Kobo Kenpo
Karate-do Nyumon” where Taira is clearly seen demonstrating techniques using a
more upright zenkutsu dachi from the Pinan kata series. Furthermore, in “Karate-do Taiken”, edited by
Nakasone Genwa, Taira is also seen using more upright stances in photos
demonstrating techniques for where the kata Aragaki Sochin (Nakasone, 1938).
As a result in his shift to using more upright
stances, Taira's karate-do became considerably softer in appearance. Much of the dynamic crispness that was
characteristic of Funakoshi’s Shotokan was gone from his kata movements. To compensate for this loss of body dynamics,
he appears to have worked on a more
accentuated hip action in order to produce maximum power with a minimum of
effort. However, this change in
direction was not shared by many in the Shotokan camp and when he taught bo
kata to Shotokan karate-ka, he adjusted his teaching methods so that a low
stance could be employed.
Although Taira shifted away from the lower stances
predominately used in Shotokan, he did not entirely abandon everything he had
learned. In certain instances he took
some of the low Shotokan stances and applied them to kobudo when he wanted to
accentuate a block. For instance, he used the zenkutsu dachi (front stance) of
Shotokan but more often than not he used Shotokan’s fudo dachi (immovable
stance). This can easily be seen in students of the Ryukyu Kobudo Hozon Shinko
Kai in their performance of the first sai kata that Taira Shinken learned,
Tsukenshitahaku no sai.
Taira was an eclectic innovator in his karate-do as
well and appears to have mixed and matched where he wanted; examples of which
can be easily seen by examining his Pinan kata series. In it we can see that Taira’s Pinan sandan
and godan are more Shotokan orientated in comparison to Pinan nidan and yondan
which appear to retain the mid-level punches and higher stances of Okinawa
Shorin-based karate-do. In many of
Taira’s Pinan kata, the movements are more linear and crisp in their delivery,
which is the distinctive signature of Shotokan kata. In general, Taira appears to have kept the
Shotokan framework in his Pinan kata, including the use of the side kick in
place of the front kick, however he seems to have reverted to using the
original neko ashi (cat stance) in place of the Shotokan kokutsu dachi (back
stance).
Reflecting on the changes Taira made to his karate-do
kata, he seems to have changed many of the traditional forms to suit his own
temperament, a practice which was in line with the thinking of that time. His
karate-do of the 1950's was much softer than that of the 1920’s and early
1930’s, but this adjustment was needed if he wanted to keep both his kobudo and
karate-do kata within the framework he was developing. Watching students of
Taira’s lineage perform kobudo and karate-do kata, one can easily recognize the
same basic rhythm, timing, embusen and execution of technique in both.
Like his kobudo katas, Taira appears to have taught
karate-do kata differently to his students.
For instance Taira reportedly knew three versions of the kata Kusanku
(Nakasone, 1999). Similarly Taira is
known to have practiced a version of Sanchin kata, but reportedly did not teach
his interpretation to his students.
Therefore, like his kobudo kata, Taira taught barely a fraction of the
karate-do forms he knew and regrettably a number have since been lost to us
(Table 1).
Taira’s reluctance
From the
supporting evidence it seems likely that Taira Shinken did know more kobudo
kata than were contained in his original Ryukyu Kobudo Hozon Shinko Kai
syllabus. Why is it then that Taira
failed to teach his students his entire repertoire of weapons kata? One can only speculate, however there are a
few plausible explanations that deserve consideration.
First, Taira
gathered such a large and extensive body of knowledge that it prevented him
from teaching all his disciples in the same manner. Taira is known to have
adapted his teaching methods according to each individual’s skill, motivation,
physique and personality (Minowa, 1998).
This can easily be substantiated by looking at the respective kata
syllabi of some of Taira’s direct students (Table 2). It soon becomes obvious that what Taira knew
and what his students are teaching are quite different. This characteristic teaching style of Taira
therefore created variation in what kata his students knew and also increased
the variation in performance of kobudo kata which were commonly known among his
students.
Next, Taira is
known to have shown a reluctance to teaching certain weapons and their related
kata. Nakamoto in his book “Okinawa
Densetsu Kobudo” states that, “Taira Sensei did not often teach the use of the
nunchaku or kama. I believe that Taira
Sensei was afraid that such weapons would be put to ill use” (pg. 109).
How reluctant Taira was to teach certain weapons traditions is unknown,
but his attitude was not uncommon in the older generation of budoka of his
time. Many karate-do and kobudo sensei
were known to have held back their complete teaching; transmitting their
knowledge only to their most trusted student(s). However in many instances, teachers failed to
pass on their knowledge and as a result after their passing, their knowledge
fade from existence.
Finally, Taira
was known to have analyzed many of the old weapons kata found in the rural
villages of Okinawa. However, Taira’s
research may have been incomplete.
Again, Hohan Soken is quoted as saying that, “…he was a history collector. He
knew them but he didn't understand them.”
Therefore his research and understanding of the old village weapons kata
being incomplete may have motivated him to withhold some of the weapons
traditions he was researching. Perhaps
he did not want to teach something that he did not fully understand or that was
inadequately researched.
References
Alexander,
G. (1991) Okinawa: Island of
Karate-do. Lakeworth, FL: Yamato
Publications.
Bishop,
M. (1989) Okinawa Karate-do: Teachers, styles and secret techniques. London: A & C Black.
Bishop,
M. (1996) Zen Kobudo: Mysteries of Okinawan Weaponry and Te. Rutland: Charles E. Tuttle Co.
Estrada,
Ernest (1978) In an interview with Soken. To-de Communications. http://206.191.29.157/frame.htm
Mabuni,
K & Nakasone, G. (1938) Kobo Kempo Karate-do Nyumon. Tokyo, Kyobunsha Shoten.
McMahon,
B. (1999) Funakoshi Bo. http://www.koshinkan.com.au/Article5.htm
McKenna,
M. (1999) Re-examining Ryukyu kobudo: An
interview with Minowa Katsuhiko. Journal
of Asian Martial Arts. Vol. (8)1, pp.74-91.
Minowa,
K. (1998). Personal communication.
Nakamoto,
M. (1983) Okinawa Dento Kobudo: Sono reikishi
to tamashi. Naha: Okiinsha.
Nakasone,
G. (1938) Karate-do Taiken. Tokyo, Shoseki K.K.
Nakasone,
M. (1999) Personal communication.
Ryukyu
Kobudo Hozon Shinko Kai (1977).
Taira,
S. (1964) Ryukyu Kobudo Taiken. Ginowan: Joujushorin.
Zalewski,
P. (1998) Personal Communication
No comments:
Post a Comment