Kyokushin: The BUDO Way

[b3n]

I have read too many negative comments about Kyokushin, people say that it is a messy and brawling, that it is completly focused on tournament traning and that it is a shallow fighting style of karate much the same as kickboxing and has no philosophy behind it.

I have found an excellent article (from blackbelt magazine, 1994) that I think everyone, especially kyokushin critics, should read.

I'm not saying that it is a superior style of martial arts, just trying to put some of the common misconceptions to rest.

Here's the link: http://www.diegobeltran.com/htms/oyama/oyamalegend.htm

It explains Kyokusin philosophy, training and the founder Mas Oyama.

Mods, delete this if it is in someway inappropriate.

OSU

Edited December 9, 2005 by b3n

[jion]

thanks for posting b3n. Can't imagine the karate scene without kyokushin.

[Tommy_P]

I remember that article, good stuff. Bad mouthing of systems is common and not just a Kyokushin thing. I can say the very same about those who bash Shotokan as being a pitty pat system. Comments like that come from the uninformed. Personally I think Kyokushin is a great style of Japanese karate and I for one love it. While my main style is Shotokan and that's where I have my rank, Kyokushin is my supplement style and I have been involved in training with a particular dojo since around 1996.

However it's up to the practitioner to decide what he wants from his training and for some Kyokushin is too kumite focused. Kyokushin has become purely Japanese while other Japanese systems hold on to their Okinawan roots. This is what I like about Shotokan. I like taking techniques and finding out their origins through Kata of Shorin for example. I like discussing these things with other knowledgeable practitioners also. I like to delve deep into my system to find out what makes it tick or how it was developed so as to know how to best use it's techniques. I have to understand the old to understand the new, there's depth in most systems this way.

With Kyokushin I don't find any of these common traits. Kyokushin is part Shotokan and part Goju but I rarely come across a Kyokushin practitioner that can discuss Shotokan or Goju's roots or fine points at any length. If asked about Shotokans roots (or Goju's) and how the techniques developed or about "in depth" bunkai concepts or kata analysis and history the knowledge isn't there. It's all about Kumite. Kyokushin concerns itself with Kyokushin and that's it, they pay little mind to other systems or even their Okinawan roots, some don't even know they have Okinawan roots.

Is that a bad thing? No, I don't think so. It could be said that other systems spend too much time on the things I mentioned and not enough on fighting. Kyokushin fights and doesn't concern itself with all the other nonsense. This all boils down to what I said at the beginning. It's about choices. I wouldn't give up my Kyokushin training. I've had a love affair with Kyokushin since the 80's when my instructor introduced us to his buddy from Japan (Kanamura) and his students in NY.

I use my Kyokushin training to enhance my Shotokan. Not because it's better but because I think they help each other and I happen to already have rank in Shotokan.

I don't listen to bashers of anything, I give it a shot and make my own decisions.

Don't be afraid to train hard and get hit. If you want to be a mechanic you have to get some grease on your hands sometimes.

Tommy

[shogeri]

I agree with many of the positive posts above.

Over 25 years, I have trained in Goju Ryu, Shotokan, and TKD ~ to name a few.

At some point they overlap, but in regards to certain philosophies regarding principles, they don't.

At their core, they are combative. That is they are based upon pugilism.

Kyokushin practitioners should not allow other's to erode their art form. They do this by practicing it as it should be practiced, and promoting it to others in a manner that does it honor and justice.

[Jussi Häkkinen]

thanks for posting b3n. Can't imagine the karate scene without kyokushin.

I can. But now again, I can imagine it without Shotokan, Wado-ryu and other Japanese styles as well. And the view I see in my mind isn't ugly...

[Oahngoji]

Kyokushin Karate is more traditional I guess, at least compared to Shinkyokushin karate. BUT I really repect kyokushin philosophy

[Dragn]

Mas Oyama was a true warrior. His life and teachings have been a big inspiration for me.

Unfortunately I feel things have gone downhill a bit in the kyokushin org since his death. Too many politics and emphasis on competition training and not enough Budo.

I have respect for kyokushin practitioners, but I'm also very critical about inadequacies in the style. But I'm critical about every style, including my own. I beleive in closely scrutinising everything we do, and constantly looking for ways to improve it.

For me the Budo roots of Kyokushin are of the utmost importance. While technically what I practise may be somewhat different to traditional Kyokushin. My heart is traditional.

[Superfoot]

Kyokushin Karate is more traditional I guess, at least compared to Shinkyokushin karate. BUT I really repect kyokushin philosophy

Really? What's up with Shinkyokushin. Doesn't that translate as True Ultimate Truth?

Mas Oyama felt the best way to exemplify HIS ethic regarding Karate, was in the accentuation of the OSU NO SEICHIN maxim. Perseverance can only be meaningfully tested when an individual has been pushed to his or her limits, to the point where they cannot, by physiological means go beyond. This is where the mental toughness and grit and determination comes in. It is through the hard training and so called "brutal" methods that instill within the student the tools necessary (stamina, drive, quick thinking) to complete the most difficult of tasks, such as Kumite. The emphasis on "fighting" in rather paradoxical. It is in "fighting" that a Kyokushin karateka learns mastery over himself, his pain, and his will to succeed. He does this in part, by mastery over his opponent in combat. Is is all a matter of approach. For me, Kumite, despite being sometimes painful, is a test. It is the free expression of all my training.

Mas Oyama took what he needed from the martial arts he studied, and used them to great effect. However, he split from Gichin Funakoshi due to ideological differences. It would appear he kept his techniques from Shotokan. His relationship with fellow Korean So Nei Chu, probably solidified his want to train harder for his breteren in Goju Ryu. It seems the circular influence is more prevalent in Kyokushin. Regardless of whether practitioners discuss such methods really relfects their intentions as opposed to the art. I am a big fan of Kyokushin, because of it's lineage and interaction with other arts, especially with Muay Thai, and it's evolution into other arts, such as Shidokan and Daidojuku. Kyokushin, despite having it's own roots, has given birth to many other styles too.

In the beginning, Kyokushin also had weapons and still maintains it's Kata.

Conclusively, I beleive that every martial art has it's own objective regarding the development of it's students. Mas Oyama felt the best way to develop strong, willfull people was through the hard, rigourous testing of the students in kumite, a spontaneous environment where both competitors were given the oppurtunites to master themselves and each other. Other arts feel that this is not necessary. Which is fine. It depends on what you want. I could never imagine participating in a martial art without a segment involving Kumite/Sparring or pad drills etc. This is because I want to push myself. I believe martial arts is about the expansion of the self and the growth of potential in a student. I do not feel I can achieve such actualisation through theory. Some others might.

Kyokushin has evolved into such a diverse style that it has lost a lot in common with it's roots, some might say. It has kept the Kihon and incorporated some new. It has retained it's kata. However, Kyokushin's way lies in the testing of the spirit under the maxim of OSU. Perseverance. This (it can be argued) cannot be accomplished when studying certain facets of the art e.g kata, but in the Kumite, where the individuals fitness and drive are pushed to limits beyond normal endurance. It is at this plateau where we should give up. But do we? That is what Kyokushin aims to teach. Where do we stop. Hopefully never.

OSU!

Superfoot.

Edited December 8, 2005 by Superfoot

[washjeff09]

Kyokushin has evolved into such a diverse style that it has lost a lot in common with it's roots, some might say. It has kept the Kihon and incorporated some new. It has retained it's kata. However, Kyokushin's way lies in the testing of the spirit under the maxim of OSU. Perseverance. This (it can be argued) cannot be accomplished when studying certain facets of the art e.g kata, but in the Kumite, where the individuals fitness and drive are pushed to limits beyond normal endurance. It is at this plateau where we should give up. But do we? That is what Kyokushin aims to teach. Where do we stop. Hopefully never.

I really liked your whole entire post. As far as some kyokushin dojos adding new things, I know that at my dojo we have a pretty big grappling, submission curriculum. Obviously, normally we prefer to stand up fight, but if the fight goes to the ground, at least we're not clueless as to what to do; however, other than this grappling, we are pretty much traditional Kyokushin: the kihon, ido geiko, and the kumite.

OSU!

[feels]

Kyokushinkaikan vs. Shinkyokushinkai... It's brother fighting brother.