Who else is using the vertical fist?

 

Ittsukan Dojo - 

I always thought Norris was using an Isshinryu thumb on top fist in this photo. It's hard to tell and his chambered hand is not in that formation.

 

Ittsukan Dojo -

It's all a little confusing. Seems there were a number of famous people that used the thumb on top fist and even the vertical punch but then moved away from them. Here's Joe Lewis, who I believe did train with Shimabukuro Eizo and another of Shimabuku Tatsuo's student's that went back to Shorinryu.

 

I

And then, there's this...also a thumb on top fist.

The Gen Lee Fist Published in Street Defense - The Practical Martial Arts Magazine, Volume 2, Number 3 Manor Books, New York, 1977 Although...

ittsukan.blogspot.com

Ittsukan Dojo

This, by Bill Wallace and others 1976. Clearly his thumb is up on top.Who was Wallace's teacher? He doesn't use that in more recent photos.

 

Ittsukan Dojo -

Come to think of it, Kyan Chotoku's thumbs look pretty high in this photo.

 

 

Arcenio Advincula -

According to Nakazato John, Kyan Chotoku did not teach it and said it was Tatsuo Sensei's innovation. The photos to me show he is not making a fist with the thumb on top.

 

Ittsukan Dojo -

 Yes, I agree. I think he is just standing with loosely clenched fists. Holding them...relaxed and, natural.

Ittsukan Dojo -

Oyata Seiyu posing with what looks like a thumb on top, Isshinryu fist.

 

TBT- 1998. Tokumura Kensho Sensei showing how Shimabuku Tatsuo Sensei tested the wrist on a punch.

 

Odds and Isshinryu Ends

  

 

Too many say that Shimabuku Tatsuo Sensei always placed the bo under his armpit when thrusting. Not in this flim clip.

 

1959,during a Demonstration in Okinawa Master Shimabuku Tatsuo had Kikuyama and Sensei Harold Mitchum fight with full Bogu Equipment.

 

 

 

Master Tsuyoshi Uechi Okinawan Isshinryu Karate 一心流沖縄伝統空手道協会

Seisan kata in Misato Dojo.....

 

 

From the archives of Tokumura Sensei. Training in the early 60'ies.

 

One of Shimabuku Tatsuo’s students Tokumura

 

 

 

A older method of being an instructor

 

 

As we get older, is it ok to just point out what should be done in your school or do you think it's time to rev up and work even harder and move faster (given health conditions) to continue the path?

 

I personally believe in doing everything that I expect my students to do. If they perform with a greater skill set than I can, that is a bonus for me as a teacher. But expectations of desired results should come with examples in my humble opinion!

 

What say you, those revered teachers and leaders in the arts? Remember there are no wrong answers, just an opportunity to share knowledge with us all.

It is nice if you can retain perfect health and always train at that level.

But that is only one possible answer.

 

I remember Funakoshi writing about his training as a boy, In his instructor’s garden.  He was not being group trained with teacher in charge.

Rather he was shown a movement, And his instructor went back to his porch and drank tea,  and watched, criticized and most often just responding again.

His instructor did not praise,  just finally showed a new kata when it was necessary.

 

Relatively an instructor running a class is a rather new thing.

I remember Mr. Lewis telling us.  how often Master Shimabuku just watched things and drank some tea.

 Beginners were taught by some seniors, The rest just trained, or not.

 

At times Shimabuku Sensei would come out and make a correction,

Show a new movement, or even offer a word when you did something right.

But the normal training was up to each person.

 

My own instructor taught much the same way. Seniors ran almost everything.

But at times sensei would come out and take over. There was no set pattern,

The key was each person was responsible for their own sweat equity.

Sensei would observe and control when something new was required.

Most of his focus was toward the senior students. But he always knew where everyone was. It was a grand approach.

 

Too soon after black belt I assumed the burden/responsibility of instructor.

Then for decades I ran everything from in front. I even at times had 25 students working on pieces of their kata, All at different stages of those kata,

And I would move from student to student making corrections.

 

Age happens, illness and injuries accrue, And my senior students too over,

 

I found I was even more involved what every student was doing,

Still teaching all of them at multi levels, Pulling away learning more myself.

 

Knowledge accumulates as time passes, You learn from everyone’s efforts.

I still handled the indoctrination of new students. And put much of my focus towards those who had been working over 30 years.

 

There is not one right answer, As in many things about karate,

There can be many, often diametrically opposed, right answers.

 

When I was a brown belt I was being trained by Charles Murray.

One day he said, “Victor, your first 20 years, your karate is your instructors karate, after 20 years your karate, is your karate.”

 

A pertinate closing thought, Back in 1985 I met Shimabukoro Zenpo at a clinic, I was not doing his art, but he knew a lot of Isshinryu in the country, from wheh he lived here.  He told me something that stuck with me.

 

Now remember this was 1984  and the explosion of karate on Okinawa was yet to come.

 

“What he said was on Okinawa everyone wanted to train with an instructor with 50 years of experience. They were not interested in training with a talented 2^nd dan.”

 

It made sense to me, what was more important on Okinawa, was the instructor’s knowledge to draw on.

 

 

Karate has so many different approaches,  My instructor training on Okinawa, experienced no testing.  Then when he taught he also did not use testing for belt promotions, using hand on experience with the students instead.

 

In time they did begin testing for Shodan, which was as much a test (one could fail) as an initiation for the successful new dan.

 

I used the same approach.  And i chose to use the unpredictability approach to class structure. No two classes ever repeating the same material.  To prepare the student for the reality of unprediciability of life a bit.

 

There were cycles of material I followed, but I never explained them to students, just had them experience their training.

 

I made another change, choosing instructor candidates to have 15 continious years of training proir to selection and acceptance from them.  Then a 5 year mentorship before they became instructor qualified.

 

When they assumed more and more, as I was less and less able, I focused even more on the students corrections, teaching the student and showing the instructor what to look our for.

 

We sort through students to develop dans, then sort through dans to discover who will stay a bit longer.

 

The mission must be to make value to every students experience to become more than they were, no matter how long they train.

A Long, Long Time Ago

 

 

A long, long time ago, when I was young in the ways of the world (as a brown belt in 1978) my instructor, Charles Murray, told me “the first 20 years your art is a reflection of your instructor, and after 20 years your art is a reflection of you.”  I have found there is much truth in that sentence.

 

 

The question is can one delete a kata from your instruction, keeping in mind the adage “Do not change the system or kata”.

 

 

For simplicity consider the modern aspect where many change what they are teaching and/or rebrand it for their convenience, ad infinitum.

 

 

In the past (no matter how you define it) it is obvious teaching curricula underwent many changes as the instructors kept working on a better methodology for them. Of course in those days it was not open instruction, rather private sharing.

 

 

I am sure that adage is older than public instruction, but as karate became systematized instruction, that probably became more evident adage repeated many time.

 

 

Yet systems continued to spring into existence, and often the kata taught grew in number, though there must have been instances where some were dropped.

 

I might offer a suggestion, the intent might have been for the student, kata should not be changed. On the other hand that did not mean for the senior instructor things could not change, No longer a student, with a lifetime of experiences, it is only natural that they would apply their insight to what they taught. And also reminding students not to change anything. Which did not apply to them. LOL>

 

 

Everyone of us have pondered these issues. In my case the Isshinryu I was taught consisted of 8 empty hand kata, and 6 kobudo kata, which I had in 1979.

 

 

On the other hand I was alone and worked to train anyplace I could, gravitating to those instructors who had more to teach.  Whenever I was attending a class where something was taught, I just did my best to remember it. Along the way I studied several hundred forms from many systems. As incredible as it sounds I know instructors whose studies made my feeble attempts pale, having studied in excess of 400 Chinese forms.

 

You realize along the way it is impossible to grasp everything. Even more humbling you finally realize you cannot share everything, Almost no one has that much time.

 

 

I did not change what was Isshinryu for my students, however there are some other studies to allow them to have a taste of other systems and also allow nobody to realize what their studies consist of.

 

 

So if your growth reaches the point that a different way presents itself to you, then perhaps the time is ripe to follow that way.

 

 

Of course also admonish your students “Do not change the kata.”

 

 

Then you are preserving the tradition.

 

 

 

I had never wanted to be an instructor, obtain rank, or even learn more kata. Those things all just happened because I could not stop doing karate. Rank was whatever my instructors wanted my rank to be. I had the Isshinryu system shoved down me by 1979, my instructor’s version) and that was enough for me.

 

But one thing that was made clear to me was that a black belt didn’t say I can’t. And as I found places and people to train with, whatever they were sharing I just did my best to learn and practice. So things started to pile up. Some of it was different versions of kata I knew, from different systems.

 

On a different mission I did seek our tai chi instruction, I had a long separate interest, and it was totally happenstance that I studied with Ernie Rothrock. As time passed I approached him about learning some kung fu forms to judge them more fairly. I believe he was amused at a karate guy caring about learning and he began a different trip covering about material from 6 of so systems, Not to become an expert, just knowledgeable.

 

Almost at the same time I started competing against Tristan Sutrisno, and we became friends. When offered an invitation to come and train, I went and learned a 1930 version of Shotoran, Aikido, Kobudo and Indonesian Tjimande which he practiced.

 

And at that time I was a true karate gypsy, Goju, Wado, Shorin, Bando were all systems I explored.

 

No doubt it was too much to retain. As time passed I had to put a lot of it aside, focusing more on my responsibility as an instructor.

 

So I learned a little, too little. But the challenge remained how to better use what I understood.

 

A frequent claim is that things were better when there were fewer kata studies. Which also ignores many, many instructors made choices to increase the studies ever before the contemporary era.

 

So lets think about going backwards.

 

Was not one kata enough. Or even more minimalist just one movement. One movement to learn how to enter any attack movement and conclude the attack.

 

Is that not the goal of all our studies? I believe so.

 

Learning many kata offers more possibilities of learning ways to conclude attacks. What depth you want those studies to take, why that is where human inspiration comes into play.

Decades ago I thought of the Okinawan Bushi and Ti(tee)

 

I was reading Mark Bishops latest Facebook piece today and I started thinking.

  

Karate which had previously been a closely held  group practice within the Okinawan Bushi , was of course changed for a school activity.

 

Itosu wrote

 

 “In the past masters of karate have enjoyed long lives. Karate aids in developing the bones and muscles. It helps the digestion as well as the circulation. If karate should be introduced beginning in the elementary schools, then we will produce many men each capable of defeating ten assailants. I further believe this can be done by having all students at the Okinawa Teachers College practice Karate. In this way after graduation they can teach at the elementary schools that which they have been taught. I believe this will be a great benefit to our nation and our military. It is my hope you will seriously consider my suggestion.”

 

http://www.traditionalshotokankarate.co.uk/ten_precepts.html

 

A tradition began (or continued?) of crafting kata for beginning students.

There does not seem to have been a need to shape those students for street defense as Okinawa was not a violent place. Rather for the strengthening bodies.

 

The thought was that karate might be used for  self defense was very secondary to the thought that it might build a stronger populace. After all why would people want to train young people to fight in the streets when there was little need to have them do so? Logically knowledge of kata applications was not the goal of the training. If any of them continued their studies it would be under an instructor in a traditional manner, and more than time enough for those studies at that time.

 

Then karate underwent a disporia and moved to Japan. That karate had a self defense purpose was not hidden from those Japanese students, the instructors even shared some of it in their books, but it does not seem that there was a direct linkage made for the student between kata practice and defensive use of karate. 

 

Although is was the pre-war years, University students for the most part were not being trained to become weapons.  Rather by design to produce healthier students for the society. Training them in more than basic applications would be a very poor use of the brief time they had to train at university for 4 years.

 

 

Then when ‘bunkai’ for kata was explained, that became the new buzz word for understanding kata in part. More so after the war, and Japanese karate had developed differently from Okinawa. So they developed their own explanations for those kata tools, which were by design prepared for a different purpose.

 

New times, new answers.

 

 

Sai – A discussion on E-budo.com

 

Ken Aligeier

 

 

Let me explain, the first Okinawan weapon kata that I learned were from the Penn State Unv. Karate club ( a Isshin Ryu group) .I learned the 3 bo kata Tokumine no Kon, Urasoe no Kon anf Shishi no Kon no Dai.  And the 2 Sai kata , Chatanyara no Sai and Kusanku no Sai


Four year ago I started to learn Ryukyu Kobujutsu/Ko-buki kata from Mr Glenard Grabow.Some of you may remember Mr Grabow's articles from the old " Bugeisha " and " Budo Dojo " magazines.I would like to the state the Mr Grabow began his training in Okinawa in 1961 and his teachers were Shinjo Masanobu,Kani Katsuyoshi,Toguchi Seikichi,Kiyuna Choyu.

 

It became quite apparent that, what Mr Grabow teaches in the context of Okinawan weapon kata is Different from some other indivduals and groups in America.What Mr Grabow teaches (and his research has shown) is the older version of the Bo Sai and Tonfa Kata.I would like to state that Mr Grabow is vary adamant about the fact that these kata should not be altered in any maner from how he learned them in Okinawa.

 

For one reason is that these older version of the weapon kata are time capsule into the past and a understanding how these indivdual fought, and if these kata are modified, their is a lost of historicsl knowledge of the past.

 

For example the kata Tokumine no Kon found in Isshin Ryu, is in fact the kata Yonegawa no Kon.I mean no disrespect, but the truth is that Tatsu Shimabuku ( founder of Isshin Ryu ) took the kata Yonegawa no Kon simplified it and renamed Tokumine no Kon.What I mean by ' simplified' is that the diffcult waza and combative scenarios are removed within the kata.Thus making the kata easier to preform and learn.This was also done to the kata Urasoe no Kon and Chatanyara no Sai.I can not comment on Shishi no Kon because I have never learn a older version of that kata.

This situation of simplifing classical weapon kata, I have noticed also has occurred within the Inoue & Sakagami schools in Japan and the The Matayoshi Kobudo( Okinawa) where their Bo kata also have are simpilfied.In Motokatsu Inoue Book " Bo,Sai ,Tonfa and Nunchaku " the two Bo kata which are demostrated Shuji and Sakugawa are lacking in the more diffcult waza found in the older version of thus stated kata , which were taught to me by Mr Grabow.I am not saying that the indivdaul skill within these schools is poor or substanard, only that the classical Bo and Sai kata have been simplified( from the older version ) over the years by different teachers, why I do not have a answer for that.

Ken,

I can not disagree with your points about the general trend of simplifying kobudo kata, but I have a couple problems with your post.

1. Shimabuku is supposed to have learned Tokumine no Kun from Chotoku Kyan. This is well known to be the only Bo kata that Kyan taught. I have not seen the version practiced by the Seibukan or other groups that follow the Kyan/ Zenryo Shimabuku teachings, so I can't say for sure if the Isshin Ryu version is Kyan's Tokumine no Kun.

2. However, Yonegawa no Kun originated in Yamanni Chinen Ryu. It is an extremely complex and difficult kata. Have you ever seen this kata demonstrated by any of the senior members of Yamanni Ryu? If you ever do, you will not believe that Isshin Ryu's Tokumine no Kun has anything to do with Yonegawa no Kun.

Shinken Taira (Shimabuku's primary Kobudo teacher) endeavored to preserve as much of Okinawa's weapon traditions as possible. By sheer necessity, many of the kata that he preserved had to be simplified. At the very least, kata that came from different traditions(with their own distinct and unique mechanics) had to made to be performed with the same mechanics. This is why Taira's kata from sources like Yamanni Chinen Ryu (Shushi, Shirotaru, Yonegawa) bear only the most superficial resemblance to those still taught in Yamanni Ryu.

BTW, I have seen both Isshin Ryu's and Taira Shinken's versions of Catanyara no Sai, and they are essentially the same. Also, I was under the impression that Taira was responsible for preserving this kata, and that most, if not all, groups doing this kata, learned it from him or one of his students. So, if Mr Grabow has a fifferent source from which he learned this kata, I would be interested to know what it is. Respectfully, can you share this with us?

 

Regards,
Brian Dunham

Not sure if this post really belongs here or the buy & sell section, but I thought I'd take a crack at it anyway as it should be of interest to kobudoka with a passion for sai and love of history.

I received a remarkable pair of old iron sai directly from the late kobudo master, Akamine Eisuke, in Okinawa a couple of years before he passed away as a gift for translating his teacher's (Taira Shinken) 1964 publication, "Kobudo Taikan." I am now considering selling them and am fielding offers. According to the late master they were used by both Yabiku Moden and Master Taira.

Interested parties can see the sai located on this page http://www.society.webcentral.com.a...ai__shi_shi.htm

and or on this page   http://www.society.webcentral.com.a...o_akamine_2.htm

Incidentally, I also have Inoue Motokatsu's three volume set (in Japanese) entitled, "Ryukyu Kobujutsu," in which there appears many sai kata: i.e. Kojo, Ugushiku, Hantaguwa, Yakaa, Tawata, Tsukenshitahaku, Hama Higa, Chatan Yara, etc. My copies are also personally autographed by the late master, who I once studied under. I would also field offers for those parties seriously interested in purchasing them.

Please make offers c/o bujin @ bigpond.com

Dear Doug, if you reason that this post is not appropriate for this thread, let me know and I'll remove it ASAP.

Yoroshiku  Patrick McCarthy

Taira showed Hama Higa no Sai in his "Ryukyu Kobudo Taikan" of 1964. Taira received Menyo from Yabiku in "Ryukyu Bojutsu and Saijutsu".

 

The exact text of it is:
Shihan Menjō
(Place:) Ikaho Onsen
(to Person:) Taira Shinken
The person given on the right (Taira Shinken) studied Ryūkyū Bōjutsu and Saijutsu for long years.

Therefore (he recieves) this license of the title of Shihan
15th of August, 1933
(Society:) Ryūkyū Kobujutsu Kenkyūkai
President Yabiku Mōden
(see the text of the Menyo in the new revised and expanded edition of that book, supervised by Inoue Kisho.)

There is also the story of Hama Higa Pechin in the new edition, taken from the handwritten notes made by Taira. According to this, the kata traces back to one Hama Higa Pechin, who went to Satsuma and later to Edo in 1682 as part of the congratulatory party for Shôgun Tsunayoshi (Tokugawa).

There he is said to have "performed a speciality of Ryūkyū in front of Shōgun Tsunayoshi: Tōde and Saijutsu Kata. This form of demonstration the name Sanchi-ryū has been bestowed upon by King Shō Tei, which afterwards was passed on as the Hama Higa no Sai Kata."

[Note: Sanchi-ryū 算知流 was the old traditional way of playing Go, stemming from the Yasui family 安井家, which had been described as "quarrel principle". Chosing this name showed some kind of submission - at that time maybe better called "respect" - for the Japanese superiority. This is only to be understood by knowing that at that time the principle of Fuseki 布石 (the strategical arrangement of the Go-stones), had been founded and the old Sanchi-ry was substituted by the Dōsaku-ryū 道策流, which was the first to use Fuseki.]

The details of the account given leave no doubt that the Taira's informations where gathered with the help of learned historians (maybe Higaonna Kanjun, who also wrote about martial arts of Ryukyu elsewhere).

Everybody may agree that this was a quite early event in terms of Ryukyu martial arts.

Timewarp:
Among the directors of Taira's association where:
Higa Yūchoku.Akamine Eisuke.and five other Okinawans.

Of course also mainland Japanese were among the directors, like Sakagami Ryusho, Inoue Motokatsu, Hayashi Teruo and many others.

Among the consulting members where (only Okinawan members listed here):

Chibana Chōshin
Higa Seikō
Soken Hōhan
Chinen Masami
Nagamine Shōshin
Yagi Meitoku
Uechi Kanei
Tamaki Juei
Miyazato Ei'ichi
Nakazato Shūgorō
Fukuchi Seikō
Shimabukuro Tatsuo
Toguchi Seikichi
Uehara Saburō
Shimabukuro Eizō
Nakamura Shigeru
Miyahira Katsuya
Kinjō Hiroshi

So I ask myself, who where the people who handed down the original form, the secret techniques, the real martial art, if not these people? And if there was someone, where did he/she learn? From Nagamine Shôshin (who you find on the above list)? Or from Masami Chinen (who you find on the above list)? Or from whom?

I saw a video (a dantai enbu) of Chatan Yara no Sai which today looks exactly the same as about in the 1960s (there are not much earlier moving picture sources). I also saw Sai and Bojutsu kata from a person, whose entry in the Bugei Ryûha Daijiten of 1978 is "Kyan-ryū (Saijutsu): Okinawa". The Saijutsu of this person was also "upgraded", in other terms, it was changed. There even was the attempt to let this Saijutsu run under a different name, only to authenticate some different person, who retroactively needs to be made some more important in history (because otherwise, the whole lineage would begin to disintegrate).

There is one thing I agree with: there are people who made up new things with the help of the old kata. But the kata and techniques have not been simplified, but rather have been "upgraded" to the popular customers wants...

It is simply other way around than suggested. Stop betraying those who worked hard and really achieved something, but are dead now. At least this is not the original Okinawan form (I read something about this in a book ).

__________________
Best regards

Andreas Quast

 

I am partially presenting a letter written by my teacher (Minowa Katsuhiko) to myself. Part of the letter dealt with Yamani-ryu and a video I had sent Minowa sensei containing Shushi no kon as performed by Mr. Oshiro. Given the current discussion on Taira and Yamani-ryu, I believe it is relevant.

This section of the letter is NOT presented as an assessment of Mr. Oshiro's' skills, but for the insights Minowa sensei provided in the commentary on his training experience.

Mario McKenna

Letter Begins...

Shushi no kon [Oshiro Toshihiro]
Mr. Oshiro's Shushi no kon is considerably different to what is practiced in the Ryukyu Kobudo Shinko Kai so I can't really comment on whether it is good or bad. A long time ago, we (Akamine, Nakamoto, myself, ect.) all learned the same kobudo kata from Taira Sensei. And although our kata may have differed, the differences were quite small.

However, a long time ago, Taira Sensei stated to us that many of his bo kata came from Yamani-ryu. Taira Sensei had four top students of Yamane-ryu who acted as advisers for his Ryukyu Hozon Shinko Kai I think and they would occasionally come to his home and their names were on the name board. Their kata and Taira Sensei's were essentially the same. I'll say it again, it could have been either Taira sensei taught us incorrectly or his Yamane-ryu juniors learned incorrectly. But at that time I believed in what I was being taught by Taira Sensei, even to this day and practice it to the best of my ability.

Letter Ends...

__________________
Mario McKenna
Vancouver, BC
Kowakai Karatedo

 
Shaz, I went to www.oshirodojo.com and, as this thread is about Sai, I read the article "The Stories and Practice of the Okinawan Sai".

Quote:

The Sai in Modern Martial Arts Practice The sai have been practiced for many years in Okinawa, but it was very individual practice. Because the sai were used primarily for self defense, they were not systematically taught as a separate martial arts style. Each person would have their own places to carry and hide their sai and developed their own favored techniques. Thus we find that sai does not have as documented a tradition in Okinawan martial arts culture as either the bo or karate. The "traditional" sai kata practiced today are of relatively recent invention.

Rhetoricall excellent, this raises some questions. Why is the term traditional set between quotation marks??? Is there any doubt among experts that there were and are traditional Sai kata?

I think the story of the Sai article must lead a lowbrow reader to the notion that there are no traditional kata and that a great part of the Okinawan inhabitants used Sai for self defense, i.e. anybody could have used the Sai. Very promising preliminary, however highly assumptive to say the least.

Let me come to that:
Chinen (Yamanni) family was of Chikudun Pechin rank:

Chinen Ueon Kana (1797-1881) seems to be first in his family to have been promoted to the rank of Chikudun Pechin, those people of the Ryūkyū class system who originally belonged to the farmers class and became "Samurai" by meritorious deeds or contributions, even though they did not originally had the genealogical table necessary for the "Bushi" ranks (remember neither the term Bushi nor Samurai in connection with Okinawan do equal the Japanese Bushi or Samurai. It is just misleading comparison. Chikudun Pechin were engaged in general administrative work as a lower class "samurai".
This person is also known by the name Chinen Chiku Nobori No Shiun Jōshina; this means “Chinen who took up a high position as a public servant.”
He is also known as Chinen Ueon Kana, which principally means the same, i.e “Chinen who achieved office.”

As far as I know, the Chikudun people were the lowest of what we now call "rank" in Ryukyu kingdoms administration. The traditional Sai Kata, which have been suggested to be not traditional (the result of such suggestions we may have seen in this thread) were, however, invented by higher ranking people, and this I assure without seeing any need for giving you the exact bibliographic reference. It seems very likely that the possession of Sai were limited to people of a certain rank upwards.

Again the list of BRD (informations as of 1978, thus not watered down very much). In brackets the rank and some info on the person associated with the Kata, which I have researched:

- Chikin Shitahaku no Sai (Court name: Shitahaku Oyakata. Rank: Oyakata. Real name: Saitaku. He compiled the Chuzan Seifu from 1697 to 1701; was the father of the famous Saion.)
- Hama Higa no Sai (Hama Higa Pechin. Real name: unknown. Went to Edo in 1682 and performed Tode and Saijutsu as a cultural speciality of Ryukyu [Satsuma liked to present Ryukyu persons a s somewhat exotic])
- Chatan Yara no Sai (Said to have been student of Kusanku, the military officer mentioned in Oshima Hikki)
- Yakaa no Sai (the complete name of the Kata is Hama Udun Yakaa no Sai. Hama means "beach", Udun means "palace" or "control palace", Yaka is a place on Okinawa. According to Nakamoto Masahiro, "Yakaa techniques" were evidently employed by young Ōji (princes) in their function as attendants to the king. Thus, these are the Sai-tecniques of the princes from or performed at "Yaka Beach Palace". The Udun were the extended residences, in which Ōji (princes) or Anji ("feudal lord") lived.)
- Hantagwa Kuragwa no Sai (Hantagwa was allegedly born in Urasoe castle town and was one of the persons who are said to have trained in Jigen Ryū Bō Odori)
- Kojō no Sai (Kojo family: Ranks: Oyakata, Pechin. The Kogusuku family of Kumemura in the Naha area is today most commonly known as the Kojō. They were undoubtedly one of Ryūkyūs premier martial arts families, indicated by them being the Shuri castle guards in hereditary succession. The Kogusuku Denka, or Kogusuku family tradition, led to todays Kojō Ryū. Kogusuku Oyakata was a high ranked Ryūkyū official and sent to China in 1665 by his father and is supposed to have studied martial arts at the court of the Chinese emperor. The emperor is said to have granted Kojō Oyakata permission to teach martial arts officially. After returning to Okinawa, it is said that Kogusuku Oyakata taught Kumiuchi-hō or “fighting methods” similar to Kempō only to his family. The Kogusuku martial art had been first formalized by Kogusuku Pechin. The second generation of the Ryū was presented by one Kogusuku Seishoei (1816-1906), who was an expert in weapons.)
- Arakaki-ryu no Sai (Well, Arakaki Seishō (1849-1920), described as a king’s Bushi who seems to have hailed from Sesoko island where his father had been posted by the Shuri government to administer as the chief magistrate for the area. Everybody knows the story of the martial arts program of 1867, when Aragaki and others performed Ryukyu Martial Arts at the royal guest house as an entertainment honoring the Chinese Sappōshi. Arakaki in 1870 was send to China as a translator (Tsuuji Pechin) by the Ryūkyū government. Arakaki was also sought out by others, like Mabuni Kenwa, Chitose Gōchoku, Toyama and Funakoshi and was a notable Bō and Sai expert.)
- Tawada no Sai (Tawada Shinboku (1814-1884))

The knowledge that there have been worn three Sai is known by the simple fact that there is the above named Kata Kojo no Sai. So, to end this, I have no doubt that there are traditional Sai kata. One may use these Kata as what they where maybe meant to be: as a template to study. One may uses these to further develop the technique, and fill some possible technical gaps. Good! One may keep the template alive in its "original form" as a subject of study for generations to come.

After all it is not really comprehensible why there is spread word that there is no such thing as traditional Sai kata and that they all have been only invented more recently. The construction of the assumptions is based on "they fought with Sai and when they fought with it it couldn't have been looking like... well, the traditional Kata". It may be true that the Ryukyu nobles in times of emergency would use other tactics than shown Omote in the Kata, but after all it is kata. These templates have been used again and again to study the martial arts by many different people.

The whole article on Sai to me just looks like rhetorical prank in which "other modern Okinawan styles" are degraded as "unsophisticated" only as a means of authenticating actions taken to promote Yamanni as an overall Kobudo.

You may think about of just point out your strong point without invalid comparisons to (undisclosed) styles, which maybe just have completely different goals.

There is no tradtional Sai kata in Yamanni-ryu (apart from what seems to be based in Kyan Shin'ei's Saijutsu). After all I can't prevent a strong feeling that many things in Yamanni-ryu seems to have been more recent developments. Again, that's absolutely ok with me, and the techniques look great. However, I have some difficulty with the rhetorical part of that all. So to me the style itself has a history of 20 years, starting from 1985 with founding of the Ryukyu Bujutsu Kenkyu Doyukai. So, in this, it isn't even important that other Okinawan styles "differ from Yamanni-Ryu in the fundamentals of their movement", because Yamanni-Ryu isn't the "original style", hasn't the "original Kata" and hasn't the "original movements and body mechanics" of Mr. Chinan Sanda, at least as far my humble opinion is concerned. Also to note: There never seemed to be the traditional (secretive) teaching only to the eldest son in Yamanni lineage.

The Okinawa Dojo list as prepared by the Okinawa Orefectural Board of Education as of 2003, there are about 430 dojo with adress, styles etc. It has two entries which include the name "Yamani", both belonging to an association called "Okinawa Shōtō-ryū Karate-dō Kyōkai"; no "Ryukyu Bujutsu Kenkyu Doyukai" there. I find it interesting that one of those uses the term "Yamani Kishaba-ryū Bōjutsu" for his style, which I may add seems absolutely fitting and correct to me, in terms of naming a tradition according to Bugei customs. It shows the root (Yamani) and it shows the further development (Kishaba). So I keep it with this.

1:
Dōjō: Tamagusuku or Tamshiro Karate
Place: Naha-shi Matsuyama
Association: Okinawa Shōtō-ryū Karate-dō Kyōkai
Martial Arts: Karate-dō, Kobudō
Training: Monday and Friday: Youths 19:15-20:30. Adults 21:00-22:30. Wednesday: Yamane Kishaba-ryū Bōjutsu 21:00-22:30　

 

2.
Dōjō: Shuri-te ?? Karate Dōjō (Yamane Chinen-ryū Bōjutsu)
Association: Okinawa Shōtō-ryū Karate-dō Kyōkai
Place: Naha-shi Shuri Akata-chō
Martial Arts: Karate-dō, Kobudō (Bōjutsu)
Training: Monday and Wednesday: 19:00-20:30. 20:45-22:30. Saturday: 10:30-12:30.

The explicit Kobudo associations named are the following:
Ryūkyū Kobudō Seidōkai
Ryūkyū Kobudō Ryūkonkan
Ryūkyū Kobudō Yōryū (Eiry&#363kai
Kingai-ryū Tōde Matayoshi Kobudō
Ryūkyū Kobudō Hozon Shinkōkai
Okinawa Kobudō Dōshi Renseikai
Okinawa Dentō Kobudō Hozonkai
Ufuchiku-den Ryūkyū Kobujutsu Hozonkai
Ryūkyū Kobudō Hozonkai
Ryūkyū Kobudō Tesshinkan Kyōkai
Ryūkyū Dentō Kobujutsu Hozon Budō Kyōkai

Under "others" are some more like:
Motobu Udun-dî Kobujutsu Kyōkai
Okinawa Ryūei-ryū Karate Kobudō Ryūfūkai

If there are any further doubts of the existence of traditional Sai kata (net recently invented "traditinoal" Sai kata), I would recommend consulting one of these.

One more that looks like if an overwork is nessecary:


Soeishi (1752-1825) is placed as a student of Chinen Kana (1797-1881) see above in this post).
According to this, Chinen Kana would have been the teacher of a 45 years older Soeishi. When Chinen became a Bo-master at, hypothetically, the age of 20 (which is young, I guess), Soeishi would have been 65! That would have been 1817. Soeishi would have had the opportunity to study under Chinen for 8 years, until Soeishi's death in 1825, aged seventy-three. Can anybody believe this was possible?
Also, Soeishi is said to have been of Udun rank, which is similar to a governor (Udun are large residences where princes and Anji chieftains lived). He is also called Soeishi Dunchi, indicating a similar higher rank. Whatever it may really have been, it is accepted, that he was a man of high rank. Soeishi is said to have lived in the Onna village in the Shuri region and to has been the instructor of the royal lifeguard, and also that he had been held in high regard by the Satsuma. Inoue described Soeishi as follows:

Quote:

Daimyō from Shuri. He was a great Bōjutsu master. Chōun, Shūshi and Soeishi no Kun are his product.

So maybe there is a little mistake in the lineage, and in fact Chinen was a student of Soeishi?

The lineage also present Kanagusuku Ufuchiku Sanda (1841-1926) as a student of Chinen Kana (this is the only lineage I could find stating this). Kanagusuku became the security commander of the final Shō Dynasty of king Shō Tai in 1879 (the year of the abolition of the Ryukyu-han and the establishment of the Okinawa-ken was finally pushed through). He created techniques with twenty-five ancient weapons, thus creating his Ufuchiku-den or the Ufuchiku tradition. The BRD gives no teacher of Kanagusuku, but as his student Yabiku Moden, one of the important persons responsible for handing over traditional Saikata.

And also Tawada is noticed in the lineage (such entry also found nowhere else), who was the founder of Tawada-ryu Saijutsu (Tawada no Sai), which was handed down by Yabiku Moden, and now being degraded as unsophisticated.

No matter how sophisticated your performing and martial art may be: the jumbled up chaos and constructed suggestive arguing has brought up fruits which I witnessed personally, so I am "educated" to respond to such threads, no matter what you feel.

Quote:

I normally try to stay out of heated debates as they prove childish, however naive posts tend to coax a response out of me to individuals I feel aren't educated to respond to such threads.

Apart from that: yes, it looks good. Andreas Quast

Andreas,

I had a conversation with Oshiro sensei about Yamanni Ryu and the weapons that were taught. Mr. Oshiro was quite open with me and said that Yamanni Ryu was just the bo. That's all that he knew of Yamanni Ryu and that the knowledge of the other weapons that he learned came from other sources. He tells the story of asking his bo teacher about learning sai and other weapons. He said that Mr. Kishaba told him to go pick up a pair of sai and go find someone to teach him. The point of all of this is that while Mr. Kishaba can wield a mighty fine sai, he only teaches as Yamanni ryu, the bo. The sai tonfa, nunchaku and kama, as Mr. Oshiro said is "MSG", something to give flavor and has come frome other sources, including Mr. Oshiro himself. Of the Sai kata that he taught, the closest thing to a "traditional" sai kata was his version of Kyan no Sai. The others either one of the Kishaba bros made up themselves or Mr. Oshiro made up himself. He was quite up front about that.

I'd be very "interested" if the story had changed from the one that he, himself, told me.

With regard to the bo kata in the video, the Choun No Kon (sho and dai) were authored by Chogi Kishaba. They're not in any way shape or form to be confused with the Choun kata in Matayoshi kobudo. I've not seen the kanji, but I was told by Mr. Oshiro that the kanji in the RBKD Choun kata reflect the characters of Chogi Kishaba's name. Ryubi no kon is also a "fundamental kata" that was brought in to teach the methodology of Yamanni Ryu, but isn't a kata that came from Yamanni Ryu. I belive it was a kata taught in Mr. Nagamine's dojo known as "Shiromatsu No Kon". Again Mr. Oshiro was upfront about that as well. The Shuji no kon Sho in the video is a slightly altered version of the Shuji no Kon of Yamanni Ryu. The differences are that the winding blocks were removed to make the kata a little easier to learn.

With regard to the Yamanni Shuji no kon, I've seen the Shorinkan group do the exact same kata in competitions that I've judged. They call it "Yamane-No-Bo-Shusi-No-Kon". In speaking with Pat Haley, he said that Mr. Nakazato studied with Masami Chinen, so it's not surprising that the two kata are similar. However, while the movements and order of movements are the same, the dynamics of the movements are very different between the groups that come from Kishaba and the Shorinkan group. The Shorinkan group's movements that I've seen seem more consistant with the Shinken Taira and Kenshin Ryu derived groups that I've seen.

Rob