Okinawan Goju-Ryu + Kobudo?

[Chado]

I was curious how other schools treated 'weapons' or kobudo. My school used to be Japanese Goju and we did weapons kata's as part of our grading...a few years ago we switched to Okinawan style my sensei's sensei's dont count the weapons as part of anything because they say its separate. If we want to do kobudo that's fine but that's not what they do.

 

In our school we still maintain doing weapons (Bo at orange belt, tonfa's at purple belt, sai's at brown, etc;) but when my sensei's sensei's come to town we never do any weapons stuff with them, and my sensei never has to do weapons for his gradings now.

 

How about the other goju practitioners? Weapons at your school? No weapons? Separate class for it? Separate belt system for it?

 

I'm just curious

 

Regards,

 

Chad

[kataman]

In our school (shotokan)we don't teach kubodo cause, karate mean empty hand. There is a kubodo school nearby with is own belt systeme.

[Shorin Ryuu]

In our school (shotokan)we don't teach kubodo cause, karate mean empty hand. There is a kubodo school nearby with is own belt systeme.

 

My response to "karate means empty hand" is here:

 

http://www.karateforums.com/viewtopic.php?t=18002

 

I'll just repost it here though:

This is a fairly common question.

 

The term karate in use today comes from "kara" (empty) and "te" (hand). This was actually only officially adopted in 1936 in order to provide a more appealing name and simply just to adopt a common name for it in the first place. Before then, it could have been called karate (kara actually referring to China) although the first mention of "karate" in a published text was in the early 1900s, I believe. A much more common way of pronouncing it was toude/toute/toudi ("tou" being the same character as "kara") depending on whether you were speaking Okinawan or Japanese. Further still, it could have just been referred to as ti (te). Usually, the more Chinese influenced styles were referred to as toudi, although this wasn't necessarily a strict rule, either. Plus Chinese influence came in many waves, so much of that is even subjective.

 

ANYWAY.

 

In the proverbial "old days", many masters trained both in empty hand and weapons training. The reason for this is simple. Most of the people who actually did the main bulk of martial arts were part of the warrior nobility. It really wasn't until relatively recently, with the abolishment of the nobility class in the late 1800s and the introduction of karate into the school system in the early 1900s that Okinawan "karate" has been "open to the public", so to speak. But back on topic, these people did weaponry because they were nobility, royal bodyguards, merchants/merchant guards, constables or other law enforcement, etc.

 

I and others have mentioned how relatively new the concept of "styles" in general is on Okinawa, although it is very much a hard reality in the present day. In those old days, masters shared students or traveled to other places and trained/shared knowledge and all that. The weapons development was much the same way. You had family traditions as well as some village traditions. Obviously weapons like the bo had many practitioners among nobility and commoners alike. Weapons like the sword or the sai were far less common amongst regular folk.

 

Nowadays, there are schools dedicated solely to empty hand, solely to weaponry, or schools that include both, either incorporating their own weaponry systems or borrowing from established weaponry schools. The efforts of such weapons greats like Taira preserved and formalized many weapons kata all around Okinawa. Other schools like Yamani focus on the bo.

 

Regardless, the point is that "empty hand" is a new name and really has no bearing on what true "traditional" "karate" is. The use of weapons was always and still is fairly common.

 

I've noticed that it is more typical of Japanese karate schools not to teach weaponry within their dojo, whether that weaponry is part of their style or part of unique weapons systems. This isn't an absolute rule. Some Okinawan masters (There was one...but his name eludes me right now) feel that learning weaponry is too distracting for empty hand. I disagree rather respectfully with those who say that though...

 

In my system (it used to not be this way until relatively recently) they actually have separate rank for the weapons system. However, the ranking only starts at shodan or higher and there are also those places that test their students at the same time (empty hand shodan and weapons shodan, for example).

 

Edit: I didn't mean this to sound like we don't train weaponry until you are at shodan rank. I just meant that there are no kyuu rankings in our kobudo system. In other words, you train for quite a while without having any kobudo rank...

Edited February 21, 2005 by Shorin Ryuu

[jarrettmeyer]

However, the ranking only starts at shodan or higher....

 

We are similar at my school - no weapons until Shodan. When I asked my Sensai, he said something close to: "Weapons are an extension of your body. You have to learn to use your body first." Then, if you decide to continue with weapons training, you start all the way over at the beginning - pinan shodan no sai.

 

I was really excited. "Man, I can't wait until I get to BB and can start learning sai and tonfa and jo and nunchuku." (Seems weird for a 26 year old, doesn't it? Sounded like I was 13 there for a moment.) Then I saw a student knock himself out with a nunchuku to his own temple. "Nevermind. I can wait."

[Shorin Ryuu]

Oh, I didn't mean to leave the wrong impression. We do weapons before the rank of shodan. There are no ranks in kobudo given out before shodan (meaning, there are no kyuu ranks in kobudo in my system). This means you'll train for quite a while without having any rank in kobudo.

 

Edit: By the way, I don't necessarily view doing empty hand kata with weapons as the best way to learn them. While you do want it to be an extension of your hand, so to speak, many of the empty hand kata were not necessarily designed with a weapon in mind. Each weapon has it's own unique characteristics in addition to the general principles that apply to both empty hand and weapon fighting. These unique characteristics are important in getting a real depth for your training in the weapon. You can only get these characteristics by studying kata designed specifically for that weapon.

 

I understand if things like pinan shodan no sai are just to aid the beginner without having to learn a brand new form. However, I think it is inefficient and the student would just be better off learning drills and weapon-specific forms from the beginning. What does everyone else think of this?

 

Edit2:Oops, I guess I'm starting to hijack the thread...I'll just re-ask that question in the weapons forum....

Edited February 21, 2005 by Shorin Ryuu

[italian_guy]

No weapons in our Okinawan goju ryu class, but this is only a head-instructor decision.

[informer]

Kobudo and Karate are not one in the same.

 

In Okinawa many many people ONLY train kobudo.

 

In Canada esp. the Don Warrener/Richard Kim schools tend to do both. Or at least they try. I mean how many rabbits can you chase? Okinawa Goju Ryu is hard enough to master if you really want to MASTER it.

[Chado]

Kobudo and Karate are not one in the same.

 

In Okinawa many many people ONLY train kobudo.

 

In Canada esp. the Don Warrener/Richard Kim schools tend to do both. Or at least they try. I mean how many rabbits can you chase? Okinawa Goju Ryu is hard enough to master if you really want to MASTER it.

 

My sensei started training under Don Warner...but he has completly abandoned that line of thinking. We train under veras-sensei who achieved sixth degree at the jundo-kan in Okinawa with Miyazato-sensei before he passed on. I don't think the kobudo is a 'lingering element of the old style' because we do lots of things for 'fun' sometimes that aren't part of our style...but since he includes the weapons in our grading that's why I brought this up.

 

Interesting feedback I'm getting. The general consensus is they shouldn't be considered part of the same thing....that my kendo training is just as different from karate as my kobudo training.

 

Interesting information...not that it matters persay, but I like to hear how others do things. I have tunnel vision phobia lol. I try to keep my mind open to as many things as possible.

 

Thanks,

 

Chad

[informer]

Chad

 

do you still train the Don Warrener kobduo?

[Chado]

Chad

 

do you still train the Don Warrener kobduo?

 

No, my sensei cleaned it up and we dont do any of the flashy openings/closes anymore. No unnecessary movements. To be honest I'm not 100% sure where my sensei learned the kata's we are doing now...now that you mention it I am going to ask him. But most of the senior belts at the dojo have been around since we used to do it ' the old way ' and so they have to remember not to do the ridiculous spinning moves / and the cocky standing fist on the hips moves.

 

My sensei respects the Don Warner style for getting him into martial arts...but he looks at it like an old car that has now died. "Let's not forget it...but let's not use it anymore either". My sensei is also a member of the JKF and so he has to do all his kata two ways, the Okinawan way, and the Japanese way...it gets a little confusing sometimes. But I would like clarification on the weapons. I'll ask him tomorrow when I see him.