View Full Version : Ki and other concepts that scare the hell out of pansy so-called traditional budoka
So should we as ‘Western-Minded’ practitioners of martial arts strive to understand and teach the beliefs and traditions of our Ryu-Ha founders? or Do we write off what they taught us because they addressed a concept called Ki. Do we write off things such as the life force that we strive to harmonize with in seiryoku zenyo or other teaching such as Ki Ichi Hogen? Do we write these off as ‘flim-flam’?
Do we respect traditions we were given? Maybe the founders of traditional systems were talking ‘flim-flam’. I don’t know.
Maybe the western-mind is suffering from a cultural diversity issue?
Maybe all the charlatans, flakes and real flim-flam guys has everyone so repulsed that no one is will to observe the real traditions we were given. Maybe people are scared they will be associated with such so they have thrown the baby out with the bath water.
Maybe Budo is dead?
It hate to read the writings of ‘traditional’ martial artist that tries discredit the belief system held by the men who’s methods they profess to practice. It doesn’t seem right some how.
Do any classes other than mine still begin with at least a short miniscule moment in zazen? Or do they all now start with a mutual chicken head bob and a Yo Wassup!?
Rasputin
02-09-2006, 15:21
I think that our martial predecessors tried very hard to explain normal physical properties with the science that was available to them at the time. Were they to be alive today, their answers might be different than "Mystical Energy" and "Ki".
Or perhaps not. Many of them tried to lump religions of the time with their martial arts and this is still going on to this day. Doesn't make them any more correct in their explanations, IMHO.
Believe what you like. It doesn't urinate in my Cheerios. As for me, personally, everything I have learned in my jujutsu can be attributed to simple physics, yet it works pretty damn well.
Andrew Green
02-09-2006, 15:28
All depends on where your interests lie. There is nothing wrong with adapting a martial art to fit your own culture, and there is nothing wrong with practicing it according to the culture it came from.
Some people are looking for practicallity, others excercise, others "spiritual journey", others a fun hobby, and countless other reasons.
One of the great things about martial arts is the diversity. You can find pretty much any approach you want if you look for it.
So should we as ‘Western-Minded’ practitioners of martial arts strive to understand and teach the beliefs and traditions of our Ryu-Ha founders? or Do we write off what they taught us because they addressed a concept called Ki. Do we write off things such as the life force that we strive to harmonize with in seiryoku zenyo or other teaching such as Ki Ichi Hogen? Do we write these off as ‘flim-flam’?
Do we respect traditions we were given? Maybe the founders of traditional systems were talking ‘flim-flam’. I don’t know.
Maybe the western-mind is suffering from a cultural diversity issue?
Maybe all the charlatans, flakes and real flim-flam guys has everyone so repulsed that no one is will to observe the real traditions we were given. Maybe people are scared they will be associated with such so they have thrown the baby out with the bath water.
Maybe Budo is dead?
It hate to read the writings of ‘traditional’ martial artist that tries discredit the belief system held by the men who’s methods they profess to practice. It doesn’t seem right some how.
Do any classes other than mine still begin with at least a short miniscule moment in zazen? Or do they all now start with a mutual chicken head bob and a Yo Wassup!?
I don't think we discredit or disrespect our martial ancestors by "throwing cold water" on the notion of ki/chi. I think that years ago, the ability of a practiced MA-ist to move/throw/defeat a larger opponent was attributed to a mystical force called chi/ki that could only be developed through experience, while in the years since, scientific analysis has pretty much proven the ability to be due to mechanical and kinesiological concepts such as leverage, positioning, and momentum. It is not a discredit to our ancestors to recognize that they were not aware of the physics behind their techniques.
As an analogy, many years ago, doctors used herbal medications. Many of those herbs have indeed been found to have chemicals that when extracted and chemically manipulated by a pharmaceutical company, become bona-fide, powerfully effective drugs. Back then, it was thought that the herb had "magic powers". Now, science has proven what really caused some herbal treatments to be helpful in given situations.
I am a traditional TKD stylist. We begin each class with a brief seated meditation/zazen that in Korean is referred to as "muk-yum". The idea is to
clear our head of whatever "baggage" from the day that we might have brought in with us that day, so that we may train better. In conjunction with this, I do believe that we are stronger and more effective in the execution of our techniques when we are in a "no-mind" state. It has been proven that the human body is much stronger than we think. Our brains have automatic inhibitors/governors that limit our strength. These inhibitors can be tricked to some degree. Ask any LEO who has attempted to arrest someone on PCP.
I think if you can be in the "no-mind" state when you are performing a technique, you can move somewhat beyond your natural strength limits.
To be in this "no-mind" state, you must have practiced the technique enough to be able to execute it without thinking, as a reflexive action. Again, I think our ancestors attributed this strength boost to mystical ki/chi power, when it was nothing more than a case of being expereinced enough to execute a technique without thinking.
Just my opinion. In reading your posts, you have been training much longer than I have, so I defer to your experience
I am not addressing martial arts. I don’t care about martial arts. I want to address BuDo.
I am curious about people who profess to practice ‘traditional’ methods of BuDo yet at the same-time profess that the belief system held by the founders of their RyuHa was ‘flim-flam’.
I don’t know what kind of Jujutsu you guys do. Is it gendai Budo, Koryu, homegrown American Jujutsu? Is there a belief system do you have a school philosophy etc... I don’t know. I don’t care.
I want address people who practice methods taught by men such as Doshin So, Ueshiba, Miyagi, Kano, etc……. Men who had beliefs and philosophies who’s current generations seem to be either afraid to address or just think there founder may have been full of crap.
PS : Ki may just the start. Ki just happens to be an easy hot button issue. There other issues.... Issues that used to sort of define what BuDo and BuJutsu were.
Rasputin
02-09-2006, 16:03
I am not addressing martial arts. I don’t care about martial arts. I want to address BuDo.
I am curious about people who profess to practice ‘traditional’ methods of BuDo yet at the same-time profess that the belief system held by the founders of their RyuHa was ‘flim-flam’.
I don't think it fit the conventional definition of "flim-flam" in that it was not intended to defraud others. It is just that those were the concepts which were available to them at the time, scientifically and culturally.
I don’t know what kind of Jujutsu you guys do. Is it gendai Budo, Koryu, homegrown American Jujutsu?
Extensive information about the jujutsu that I practice can be found at www.heiwashin.org. If you want further information on the background of the style, you would do best to PM Robert on the topic, as I would not stoop to presume here.
I want address people who practice methods taught by men such as Doshin So, Ueshiba, Miyagi, Kano, etc……. Men who had beliefs and philosophies who’s current generations seem to be either afraid to address or just think there founder may have been full of crap.
PS : Ki may just the start. Ki just happens to be an easy hot button issue. There other issues.... Issues that used to sort of define what BuDo and BuJutsu were.
Well, that excludes me then, even though I too practice Budo. Good luck in your search.
Gene Williams
02-09-2006, 21:11
So should we as ‘Western-Minded’ practitioners of martial arts strive to understand and teach the beliefs and traditions of our Ryu-Ha founders? or Do we write off what they taught us because they addressed a concept called Ki. Do we write off things such as the life force that we strive to harmonize with in seiryoku zenyo or other teaching such as Ki Ichi Hogen? Do we write these off as ‘flim-flam’?
Do we respect traditions we were given? Maybe the founders of traditional systems were talking ‘flim-flam’. I don’t know.
Maybe the western-mind is suffering from a cultural diversity issue?
Maybe all the charlatans, flakes and real flim-flam guys has everyone so repulsed that no one is will to observe the real traditions we were given. Maybe people are scared they will be associated with such so they have thrown the baby out with the bath water.
Maybe Budo is dead?
It hate to read the writings of ‘traditional’ martial artist that tries discredit the belief system held by the men who’s methods they profess to practice. It doesn’t seem right some how.
Do any classes other than mine still begin with at least a short miniscule moment in zazen? Or do they all now start with a mutual chicken head bob and a Yo Wassup!?
We do zazen at the beginning and end of class, for a couple of minutes. Pretty much the Ogasawara etiquette in our dojo. We have a shinza; no flags, pictures of ourselves, framed belts, etc. Just a blank wall with a table for the shinza with an ikebana, a rock, an incense burner. Only dan may approach the shinza or clean it or light the incense. I don't like anything in the dojo area that isn't directly related to training or the spirit of budo...that means: no clocks, no street clothes, no BS hollywood posters, no toy weapons, no drink machines, no display tables with crap for sale, no diplomas, no trophies, no tape or dvd players, no kids under 12 and no parents, no pictures of anyone other than the founders (on a side wall near the front but not at the shinza). Only WHITE gi in the dojo...one patch! And don't leave your crap on the floor, either. Oh, and none of those dumb fighting pads for your hands and feet. I do not allow them in my dojo. Learn focus! :bow:
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 06:23
I am not addressing martial arts. I don’t care about martial arts. I want to address BuDo.
I am curious about people who profess to practice ‘traditional’ methods of BuDo yet at the same-time profess that the belief system held by the founders of their RyuHa was ‘flim-flam’.
I don’t know what kind of Jujutsu you guys do. Is it gendai Budo, Koryu, homegrown American Jujutsu? Is there a belief system do you have a school philosophy etc... I don’t know. I don’t care.
I want address people who practice methods taught by men such as Doshin So, Ueshiba, Miyagi, Kano, etc……. Men who had beliefs and philosophies who’s current generations seem to be either afraid to address or just think there founder may have been full of crap.
PS : Ki may just the start. Ki just happens to be an easy hot button issue. There other issues.... Issues that used to sort of define what BuDo and BuJutsu were.
Ed, your mailbox is full, so I'll have to embarrass you....I'm glad you have started posting more. I really value what you have to say; you have already helped my karate by making me think about things and try to incorporate them better in my practice. Do not get disgusted and leave. Gene.....Now, go empty your f...ing mailbox. :bow:
Brian R. VanCise
02-10-2006, 08:12
Gene,
I am with you in that I enjoy a training hall that has a good
clean appearance without stuff (pictures, belt displays, water
dispenses, etc) covering the walls and a central focus point
at the front that has a clear, clean area so the students can
concentrate and prepare for training.
Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com
I erased all my PMs.
I am not disgusted or angry Gene. This is a subject I have been thinking about for sometime.
Fundamental principles that we were originally taught to us as part of our training and BuDo upbringing are being discredited, laughed at and made a mockery of. That is OK. What I am curious about is how this can be done by those who practice Ryu Ha or other methods that have these fundamental principals as part of their founding doctrine. Shouldn’t these people now take up a new discipline? Perhaps Jello wrestling would be good. :laugh:
The on the first day of karate I was taught how breath. During my education in breathing I learned how to sit and breathe, how to stand and breathe, and how to punch and to breathe. I eventually learned different ways of breathing. Miyagi wrote in 1936 that Sanchin was Moving Zen.
Now I would like to tell you about "Heishu" or "Heishu Kata" and "Kaishu" or "Kaishu Kata" to give some information to those who study karate. "Heishu" means fundamental Katas. Before entering the way of karate, you have to develop your body and mind by doing Sanchin exercise of Gojuryu.
I will explain in detail. You stand straight firmly with stable stance of feet,
and hands positioned properly, breathing harmoniously, then you can feel Sanchin ecstasy. It is a still version of Sanchin. We also have active version of Sanchin which has another name "Peppuren". Usually we call Sanchin for both versions. Tanden (= a point a couple of inches below the navel), the back of the head and the buttocks are three focus points on which you have to concentrate your attention during Sanchin exercise.
Brief instructions are the following. Tuck your chin in. Lift the back of your
head high. Focus on Tanden (= a point a couple of inches below the navel) to
charge with the energy. Your buttocks should be tucked in. These three focus points are not originally separated from each other, but have inseparable relationship. In addition to them, there is another focus point: the middle point between the eyebrows.
Zazen….Sanchin…..same same.
The Shorinji Kempo of Doshin So is a discipline and institution I have always had great respect for. My teacher started his Goju training at a Buddhist temple that shared training space with a Shorinji Kempo group. HE gave some of my initial insights into their practice then the rest of my knowledge comes from conversations and readings on the discipline. Shorinji Kempo was registered as a religion with the Japanese government, I suppose it still is. Back in the 60s Kenshi would dress properly in order to go to the dojo and practice. This was done out of respect for the institution and respect for themselves. The same reasons I still wear a suit when I go to church. Kongo Zen and Kempo went hand in hand. Now I read on the Kempo boards that there is a, initiative to separate Kongo Zen from Shorinji Kempo. Sounds like some sort of marketing plan to me or at least a way to make Kempo more appealing to foreign audiences perhaps. What would Doshin So think about separating the Kempo from it’s belief system?
Used to be Americans interested in martial arts would read things like the Joe Hyams book or the Forrest Morgan book or at least were advised to read these things by other BuDoKa. Now beliefs in such fundamental core ideas seem to be thought as ridiculous by those who claim to practice Budo. Hopefully at least the AiKiDoKa still have some convictions in their practice.
My PM box is empty
SteyrAUG
02-10-2006, 11:24
I don't find Ki to be "flim flam."
In fact there is almost NOTHING in correct, trtaditional martial arts that I find to be "flim flam." While "some" techniques may be "dated" that doesn't make them "flim flam" and they are usually translatable to modern needs.
The problem with "ki" and other esoteric ideas associated with the martial arts are that they are NOT "the force" they are often depicted as in modern media. So you won't be using your ki to levitate or shoot fire out of your hands.
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 11:27
I erased all my PMs.
I am not disgusted or angry Gene. This is a subject I have been thinking about for sometime.
Fundamental principles that we were originally taught to us as part of our training and BuDo upbringing are being discredited, laughed at and made a mockery of. That is OK. What I am curious about is how this can be done by those who practice Ryu Ha or other methods that have these fundamental principals as part of their founding doctrine. Shouldn’t these people now take up a new discipline? Perhaps Jello wrestling would be good. :laugh:
The on the first day of karate I was taught how breath. During my education in breathing I learned how to sit and breathe, how to stand and breathe, and how to punch and to breathe. I eventually learned different ways of breathing. Miyagi wrote in 1936 that Sanchin was Moving Zen.
Zazen….Sanchin…..same same.
The Shorinji Kempo of Doshin So is a discipline and institution I have always had great respect for. My teacher started his Goju training at a Buddhist temple that shared training space with a Shorinji Kempo group. HE gave some of my initial insights into their practice then the rest of my knowledge comes from conversations and readings on the discipline. Shorinji Kempo was registered as a religion with the Japanese government, I suppose it still is. Back in the 60s Kenshi would dress properly in order to go to the dojo and practice. This was done out of respect for the institution and respect for themselves. The same reasons I still wear a suit when I go to church. Kongo Zen and Kempo went hand in hand. Now I read on the Kempo boards that there is a, initiative to separate Kongo Zen from Shorinji Kempo. Sounds like some sort of marketing plan to me or at least a way to make Kempo more appealing to foreign audiences perhaps. What would Doshin So think about separating the Kempo from it’s belief system?
Used to be Americans interested in martial arts would read things like the Joe Hyams book or the Forrest Morgan book or at least were advised to read these things by other BuDoKa. Now beliefs in such fundamental core ideas seem to be thought as ridiculous by those who claim to practice Budo. Hopefully at least the AiKiDoKa still have some convictions in their practice.
My PM box is empty
I agree, Ed. The first thing I learned was to bow, sit seiza, and breathe properly, as well. I believe that many of the effects of ki can be explained from a physiological standpoint, but it encompasses much more than that. There just isn't much really traditional karate being taught compared to all the pekker measuring MMA/BJJ stuff. It takes too long for most people in today's McDonald's mentality..."we want it hot and we want it NOW!" Fries with that? :laugh:
Hi Gene,
A problematic characteristic I find is how people seem to believe that there are ‘many reasons for why people practice Budo’. I think this idea is a problem. There may be many reasons that causes an individual to first enter a dojo but if the practitioner does not abandon those reasons they are eventually doomed to failure. Budo has no reason. Budo has no goal. It isn’t something you practice or something you do or something you learn. It is something you are.
If someone is Budo because of a goal they will quit. They will either: 1) find the goal unobtainable and quit or 2) they will eventually reach their goal and quit. I have seen a lot of ShoDan students quit after being graded to black belt over the years
Just because martial art media folks have depicted fallacious representations of BuDo core concepts I still do not understand why BuDoKa would respond by turning away the basic principles of what they do. But then again even St. Peter denied Christ three times.
Like it or not Chan Buddhism absorbed Taoist ideas and the Samurai adopted Chan and made it Zen during the Edo period. Also the teachings of Confucius defined the basic Asian pedagogy. These factors forged and defined fundamental BuDo. It is what it is.
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 12:01
Hi Gene,
A problematic characteristic I find is how people seem to believe that there are ‘many reasons for why people practice Budo’. I think this idea is a problem. There may be many reasons that causes an individual to first enter a dojo but if the practitioner does not abandon those reasons they are eventually doomed to failure. Budo has no reason. Budo has no goal. It isn’t something you practice or something you do or something you learn. It is something you are.
If someone is Budo because of a goal they will quit. They will either: 1) find the goal unobtainable and quit or 2) they will eventually reach their goal and quit. I have seen a lot of ShoDan students quit after being graded to black belt over the years
Just because martial art media folks have depicted fallacious representations of BuDo core concepts I still do not understand why BuDoKa would respond by turning away the basic principles of what they do. But then again even St. Peter denied Christ three times.
Like it or not Chan Buddhism absorbed Taoist ideas and the Samurai adopted Chan and made it Zen during the Edo period. Also the teachings of Confucius defined the basic Asian pedagogy. These factors forged and defined fundamental BuDo. It is what it is.
You are correct about all of that. It isn't the goal, it is the journey. Remember the old zen story about the little fish who asked his mama what a fish was? She just swam all around, flipped, jumped out of the water, and swam back. That was her answer. Ask me what karate is...I guess I'll do a kata. :)
My Wado sensei always said that everything done in Wado and Shinto Yoshin Ju-Jitsu can be explained scientifically. That has always been the same stance of every single judo sensei I have trained under. As those arts are all modern derivations, it doesn't really suprise me that they use more modern language to describe the results they achieve through diligent practice.
Ed, I do understand your concern, but there is another concern that should be talked about along with yours. That is the concern of many people to stubbornly cling to dogmatic ideals in the interest of preserving tradition. In some cases, the founders just did not get some things right. No big deal; any living and breathing art will progress and become better, thus slightly different, over time. Dogmatic tradition sometimes has the effect of stunting the growth of an art, condemning it to permanent stagnation. This, in my opinion, is MUCH more of a danger to traditional arts.
The curved-earth people took a hellacious beating from the traditional flat-earthers for a long time, in spite of solid evidence that the earth was round. You could literally be killed for making such a suggestion, because it challenged the traditional institutions of the time. I don't think we run that risk with koryu or traditional martial arts, but I think it is a comparison that should be looked at.
Gene, I've seen MUCH more "pekker measuring" in karate than I have seen in BJJ to this date. I don't think you can fairly lump all BJJ'rs together, just like I cannot lump all karateka together either. Also, BJJ does not appeal to the McDojo crowd. On average, it takes twice as long to achieve dan rank in BJJ than karate.
Jeff Cook
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 12:28
My Wado sensei always said that everything done in Wado and Shinto Yoshin Ju-Jitsu can be explained scientifically. That has always been the same stance of every single judo sensei I have trained under. As those arts are all modern derivations, it doesn't really suprise me that they use more modern language to describe the results they achieve through diligent practice.
Ed, I do understand your concern, but there is another concern that should be talked about along with yours. That is the concern of many people to stubbornly cling to dogmatic ideals in the interest of preserving tradition. In some cases, the founders just did not get some things right. No big deal; any living and breathing art will progress and become better, thus slightly different, over time. Dogmatic tradition sometimes has the effect of stunting the growth of an art, condemning it to permanent stagnation. This, in my opinion, is MUCH more of a danger to traditional arts.
The curved-earth people took a hellacious beating from the traditional flat-earthers for a long time, in spite of solid evidence that the earth was round. You could literally be killed for making such a suggestion, because it challenged the traditional institutions of the time. I don't think we run that risk with koryu or traditional martial arts, but I think it is a comparison that should be looked at.
Gene, I've seen MUCH more "pekker measuring" in karate than I have seen in BJJ to this date. I don't think you can fairly lump all BJJ'rs together, just like I cannot lump all karateka together either. Also, BJJ does not appeal to the McDojo crowd. On average, it takes twice as long to achieve dan rank in BJJ than karate.
Jeff Cook
RE: Pekker measuring...it was a generalization. I think you are missing our point. There is plenty of "development" within the tradition. But, there are certain "dogmas," if you like that word, that we will not sacrifice. I don't care that the founders may not have gotten some things right. I don't care about all the innovation in the world in BJJ, MMA, etc. It just doesn't matter to me. It is fun to watch. I've grappled a little with some judo and BJJ guys and, frankly, it didn't do that much for me. I wasn't saying BJJ or anythjing else was Mcdojo, I was simply using that as an analogy for our cultural mindset about everything, not just MA. So you see, if an MMA guy came to mine or Ed's dojo tomorrow and whipped our ***, do you think we would change to MMA or BJJ? No. That just ain't what it is about, at least, not after you really get into karate at other levels. I did all that stuff, boxing in high school, fighting with bogu for a few years, some full-contact matches around Ga. and Tennessee. I proved to myself (and a few others) whatever it was I needed to prove. That's it. If I am attacked in the street, karate is what I have, that is what I'll have to use. You dance with the one that brought you. :bow:
SteyrAUG
02-10-2006, 12:33
Hi Gene,
Budo has no reason. Budo has no goal. It isn’t something you practice or something you do or something you learn. It is something you are.
That sums it up nicely.
While I enjoy many benefits from the practice, in the end it is simply something that is part of my very being. And it has been for most of my life, and I will continue to train in some capacity for the rest of my life.
All the benefits are simply byproducts.
Gene, thanks for the clarification. You are right; I was misunderstanding you. I certainly do not think that BJJ is better than any other art; please do not misunderstand me. I am more of a traditionalist than I am given credit for. I am a lowly dan rank in karate, and am seeking to find someone whom I can train under in karate too (thus me asking if I can visit you and have you un-f some of my kata), because I greatly value everything it has to offer. I may train in BJJ, but I teach something entirely different in a much more traditional manner. Heck, even my Brazilian master in BJJ has a dan rank in Shotokan!
I also did not say that all dogmas and tradition should be abandoned. However, Ed's title to this thread is rather specific, and it is somewhat hostile, implying that budoka who do not see ki his way (whatever traditional interpretation he has) are "scared," "pansies," and not really traditional budoka. He apparently is offended by anyone who may have a different interpretation he does not agree with (thus the name-calling labels), and I would be offended by that insinuation. So if Ed does actually feel that way, that is an unhealthy dogmatic attitude that I think SHOULD be dropped. Ed, not trying to start a fight with you; I respect what you say on this forum. I guess I am just fishing for a true reflection of your feelings based upon your choice for titling this thread.
At any rate, I agree that tradition is interesting and good if it is not just for the sake of tradition. The art of war and fighting is mere pugilism without the philosophy and traditions to shape and mold it. With that, it is a positive direction in a way of life.
Jeff Cook
Ed, I do understand your concern, but there is another concern that should be talked about along with yours. That is the concern of many people to stubbornly cling to dogmatic ideals in the interest of preserving tradition. In some cases, the founders just did not get some things right. No big deal; any living and breathing art will progress and become better, thus slightly different, over time. Dogmatic tradition sometimes has the effect of stunting the growth of an art, condemning it to permanent stagnation. This, in my opinion, is MUCH more of a danger to traditional arts.
I think moderation and balance are the key here. You are correct, that mistakes were made, and there may be better ways out there. However, we should not be too quick to find fault with the tradition. It could be that we are the ones that don't yet get it.
In a theoretical ryu system, the kata are taught exactly the same, no changes made. When the master found something, he put it into his system, in his kata. Then as it is passed down to the students, the lessons he learned were preserved in the kata. Since the kata does not change, the lesson remains there for the student, even if his current sensei doesn't get it.
I mention a theoretical system, because I doubt there exist any such unchanged systems out there. However, the changes that were made, were made for a reason. I think that before we change an art or kata, we need to fully understand it. I don't think shodan, nidan or even sandan shows enough understanding to change the kata or technique.
However, I do think variations are very important. This is a way to add to the system, without changing the system. So long as the core system remains in place, we can add as many variations as we want. I think every student should look for and find variations to the katas that make the kata work for them.
The kata should be the common base, given to all the students. The students should then create variations to that kata, to make it effective for them. We must remember that different people will need different variations. (taller, shorter, stronger....) If the kata is changed by a very tall sensei, then when shorter students learn and adapt it, it gets further from the original kata. Therefore, the kata should be taught as you learned it. Then, variations to the kata may be introduced. Whats interesting is that the variations that people use, change, as they get more skill. These are different variations of the same kata.
This kata can be changed, and should be. But not by every student that takes a few classes. It should only be changed by those at the head of the organization, to preserve that common base for all the students to start with. The key is balance. We have to accept that there may be a better way to do something. We also have to accept that maybe we haven't got it yet.
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 13:06
I think moderation and balance are the key here. You are correct, that mistakes were made, and there may be better ways out there. However, we should not be too quick to find fault with the tradition. It could be that we are the ones that don't yet get it.
In a theoretical ryu system, the kata are taught exactly the same, no changes made. When the master found something, he put it into his system, in his kata. Then as it is passed down to the students, the lessons he learned were preserved in the kata. Since the kata does not change, the lesson remains there for the student, even if his current sensei doesn't get it.
I mention a theoretical system, because I doubt there exist any such unchanged systems out there. However, the changes that were made, were made for a reason. I think that before we change an art or kata, we need to fully understand it. I don't think shodan, nidan or even sandan shows enough understanding to change the kata or technique.
However, I do think variations are very important. This is a way to add to the system, without changing the system. So long as the core system remains in place, we can add as many variations as we want. I think every student should look for and find variations to the katas that make the kata work for them.
The kata should be the common base, given to all the students. The students should then create variations to that kata, to make it effective for them. We must remember that different people will need different variations. (taller, shorter, stronger....) If the kata is changed by a very tall sensei, then when shorter students learn and adapt it, it gets further from the original kata. Therefore, the kata should be taught as you learned it. Then, variations to the kata may be introduced. Whats interesting is that the variations that people use, change, as they get more skill. These are different variations of the same kata.
This kata can be changed, and should be. But not by every student that takes a few classes. It should only be changed by those at the head of the organization, to preserve that common base for all the students to start with. The key is balance. We have to accept that there may be a better way to do something. We also have to accept that maybe we haven't got it yet.
No, the kata should not be changed. Variations in bunkai should be taught, but the kata is always taught the same way. There may be variations in the kata from ryu to ryu, which is fine and historically based, but kata are not toys for students to play with. Students should not "create variations to the kata." This isn't a Bob Fossey choreography event. AND, we don't know that "mistakes were made." Who is calling them mistakes and why? I would really be interested to know if today's tough guys could handle Motobu, Itosu, Higashionna, and the like.
Gene, the original renditions of the kata WERE changed - countless times by different founders of different ryu. One traditional kata, 300 renditions of the same kata, all "correct" within the rules of that ryu.
How do you reconcile that within the boundaries of "tradition?" Virtually every founder is guilty of violating "tradition!"
Good stuff to argue about, by the way.
jeff Cook
I also did not say that all dogmas and tradition should be abandoned. However, Ed's title to this thread is rather specific, and it is somewhat hostile, implying that budoka who do not see ki his way (whatever traditional interpretation he has) are "scared," "pansies," and not really traditional budoka. He apparently is offended by anyone who may have a different interpretation he does not agree with (thus the name-calling labels), and I would be offended by that insinuation. So if Ed does actually feel that way, that is an unhealthy dogmatic attitude that I think SHOULD be dropped. Ed, not trying to start a fight with you; I respect what you say on this forum. I guess I am just fishing for a true reflection of your feelings based upon your choice for titling this thread.
That's how I read it also.
Especially since this thread seems to be borne of another thread where someone asked about ki.
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 15:15
Gene, the original renditions of the kata WERE changed - countless times by different founders of different ryu. One traditional kata, 300 renditions of the same kata, all "correct" within the rules of that ryu.
How do you reconcile that within the boundaries of "tradition?" Virtually every founder is guilty of violating "tradition!"
Good stuff to argue about, by the way.
jeff Cook
Well, no one knows how many changes were made by different founders from the original kata. But, as the various ryu took shape, the kata as done by that ryu became standard for THAT ryu. Among Shito ryu, for instance, there is an amazing amount of consistency in how the kata are done from one kai to another. All Shito ryu do the same kata. If I go to a Shito kai dojo, I know exactly what to expect and where their kata vary from our's in Motobu ha and why. If I go to a Demura school, I know ahead of time what I will see and I am never surprised....IF the instructor has not decided he is the new Mabuni. Same thing with Hayashi ha Shito ryu....I know what I am going to see and why. When I drive over to the Matsubayashi Shorin school about 30 miles away to train with their sensei, I know exactly what I am going to see; I know where the differences are and why they are there. I can tell you pretty accurately, I'll bet, what kata I would see and how they would be run if I went up to CEB's Goju dojo. Same with JKA. As long as the instructor has not gone maverick or innovated on his own, this holds true across all traditional ryu. Interpretation (rhythm, timing, spirit, kokyu, etc.) may vary, but that is fine. Bunkai will vary more, but that is where innovation is appropriate. But, across all orthodox ryu, there is a remarkable predictability and consistency. AND, the variations you see are minor...a high block in place of a middle block, a 180 degree turn instead of 90, neko ashi dachi in place of hanmi or su dachi. Some ryu jump in Pinan Godan, some don't; some ryu do the tettsui/kick combo in Pinan Yondan as a simultaneous technique, some do tettsui/kick as a sequence. That sort of stuff.
Now, among wannabee innovators and today's "Masters," there is a tendency to use this rationalization, "well, all the kata have been changed a lot anyway, there is no true tradition, everything is relative, all the founders innovated, everybody does the kata differently so why don't I just make up my own way, yatta, yatta..." as an excuse to do whatever they please. I'm sorry, but that does not happen in traditional dojo. If I go to Ed's dojo and do a side kick in Seiuchin and try to BS him that that is a legitimate innovation from some founder, he will tell me I'm full of crap. If I go to Urena's dojo and put jumping front kicks in Pinan Shodan, or do low block high punch at the end of Bassai Dai (Patsai) and try to BS him, it won't fly.
Finally, any changes or innovations that did take place in the kata that have come down to us evolved organically from within the tradition. They were logical developments from within the ryu based on the teaching and lineage of the founder. They didn't happen in a vacuum or just because he was messing around. That is a far cry from some modern day "soke" or "master" deciding he knows a better way than Mabuni, Kuniba, Motobu, Myagi, Higashionna, Kyan, Itosu, Matsumura, Sakugawa, and others.
Look at the kata like the Apostle's Creed, there are many interpretations of it (sermons), but the Creed doesn't change. I think kata should be treated as the "canons" of karate.
PS Ed was being sarcastic and tongue in cheek. He isn't as big an ******* as me. :laugh:
The title was effective and geared toward only practitioners of established traditional forms of Budo. The first post is what it is. It is merely a set of questions. Nothing addressed had anything to do with practitioners who practice a little bit of this or a little bit of that. Nothing addressed had anything to do with ‘modern’ training methods or the arts practiced by people who have went off and founded their systems. Etc…..
My questions are asked in regards to practitioners of ‘Traditional’ BuDo methods, BuDo schools that were founded on certain core beliefs. Some of these core principles are such that when they come up in conversation some practitioners of these ‘traditional’ methods seem to develop fear, denial or aversion to said core beliefs. These are ideas that when they come up in conversation people say we don’t believe in that ….. we don’t do that……that is isn’t real….that is flim-flam……or we really don't stress that etc..... This did not seem to be the case 30 years ago. I am not fishing for feedback from outsiders. I wanted to hear from practitioners of the old schools and their thoughts on my questions.
Should a practitioner who doesn’t want to hold true to the teaching principles found in his/her Ryu resign? Should he/she go out and form their school and make themselves Grandmaster founder of whatever it is they really believe in? Is that what Jeff did? If people did this would they no longer have a RyuHa to hold true to so couldn’t they just do what whatever they want? Perhaps they should not market it as “traditional’ Japanese BuDo but beyond that what the hey, it seems like an appropriate road to me.
Should AiKiDoKa stop being apologetic for believing in Kokyu and Ki? Should Karate people stop being wishy-washy or apologetic of the idea of kata as moving zen? Should Shorinji Kenshi be proud of their Kongo Zen heritage, should they separate from their Kempo?
Should I have not posted any of this here? I believe so; the idea of trying to kick off a Socratic Dialogue was probably the most ignorant thing I have done this year. There may be others here, but I only know of one guy who has a common frame and know enough about me to know where I am coming from and to understand where I am heading with the dialogue. We talk together by e-mail so I guess there wasn’t any point to it to any of this.
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 15:39
The title was effective and geared toward only practitioners of established traditional forms of Budo. The first post is what it is. It is merely a set of questions. Nothing addressed had anything to do with practitioners who practice a little bit of this or a little bit of that. Nothing addressed had anything to do with ‘modern’ training methods or the arts practiced by people who have went off and founded their systems. Etc…..
My questions are asked in regards to practitioners of ‘Traditional’ BuDo methods, BuDo schools that were founded on certain core beliefs. Some of these core principles are such that when they come up in conversation some practitioners of these ‘traditional’ methods seem to develop fear, denial or aversion to said core beliefs. These are ideas that when they come up in conversation people say we don’t believe in that ….. we don’t do that……that is isn’t real….that is flim-flam……or we really don't stress that etc..... This did not seem to be the case 30 years ago. I am not fishing for feedback from outsiders. I wanted to hear from practitioners of the old schools and their thoughts on my questions.
Should a practitioner who doesn’t want to hold true to the teaching principles found in his/her Ryu resign? Should he/she go out and form their school and make themselves Grandmaster founder of whatever it is they really believe in? Is that what Jeff did? If people did this would they no longer have a RyuHa to hold true to so couldn’t they just do what whatever they want? Perhaps they should not market it as “traditional’ Japanese BuDo but beyond that what the hey, it seems like an appropriate road to me.
Should AiKiDoKa stop being apologetic for believing in Kokyu and Ki? Should Karate people stop being wishy-washy or apologetic of the idea of kata as moving zen? Should Shorinji Kenshi be proud of their Kongo Zen heritage, should they separate from their Kempo?
Should I have not posted any of this here? I believe so; the idea of trying to kick off a Socratic Dialogue was probably the most ignorant thing I have done this year. There may be others here, but I only know of one guy who has a common frame and know enough about me to know where I am coming from and to understand where I am heading with the dialogue. We talk together by e-mail so I guess there wasn’t any point to it to any of this.
DON'T DO THAT!!!! You are getting disgusted again and will quit posting. Keep pushing the rock up the hill. :D I agree that traditional karateka, aikidoka, etc. should quit being apologetic. If you don't buy into the core beliefs of your art, quit and become a "soke" in your own right. Then you can wear all those funky looking clothes and wear stripey belts and pose with swords you don't know how to hold or wear :D
"PS Ed was being sarcastic and tongue in cheek. He isn't as big an ******* as me." Yes, you ARE pretty tall, Gene (but you're not pretty AND tall)! ;)
I hear what you are saying, but I think the difference in our views is this: What you accuse "modern masters" of is legitimate, (here is where we differ) but I don't think you realize that some of the older, now-respected masters were accused of EXACTLY the same thing by their contemporary counterparts in the other ryu a long time ago.
Example: Funakoshi had a huge problem with Ohtsuka and accused him of this very thing - the audacity of Ohtsuka changing the kata from the way Funakoshi taught him, and *gasp* changing the name from "heian" back to "pinan." And then, to add insult to injury, adding jujitsu technique to the curriculum AND kata, and worse yet - instituting competitive kumite. Funakoshi once stated that it was a strange combination, not "worthy" of being called either karate or jujitsu. He also seemed to have a problem with such a young man being so audacious as to buck tradition and "improve" upon things, with what Funakoshi saw as very little experience in any art (in spite of his menkyo, which I think he got when he was about 19 years old or so, just prior to studying with Funakoshi). Pretty much your same complaint now.
Here's an irony: Most of the Okinawan masters accused Funakoshi of the very same thing - and not just with the kata. They felt he got way too far away from the traditional roots by "watering down" the instruction for school kids, "inventing" the ten-no-kata, and other innovations.
I also believe the founder of Shito was also a Funakoshi student. How much different is that ryu from Shotokan? Why did that upstart feel the need to break from the Funakoshi "tradition" and start his own ryu?
Funakoshi did not even agree with the whole concept of "ryu" - he felt "fu" was more accurate. He said karate was karate, nothing should be changed - in spite of him being one of the most flagrant violators to do so. He once stated that it was him, an "expert" of karate, who could not even recognize the various ryu of karate he was observing and never heard of, and that he was "embarrassed" that karate had been so perverted into so many styles. And this was a lllllooooonnnngggg time ago, not in the US, and not during current times.
Now of course you have the Shotokan, the Shotokai, and also various fragmented Wado groups. The process continues.
Should I go into the extreme stylistic differences of the various well-known Aikido factions now? Tomiki was a pariah, for starters! Many well-respected aikido sensei have broken with tradition and done such crazy-a$$ed things as institute randori, one of the HUGEST violations of "tradition" in the martial arts I can think of. That goes TOTALLY against one of Ueshiba's basic TRADITIONAL principles. Oh yeah, and there is the small matter of Ueshiba making some significant changes to what Takeda taught him.......and the process continues.
Pretty much your same complaint.
Don't you see the same pattern here?
Jeff Cook
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 16:04
"PS Ed was being sarcastic and tongue in cheek. He isn't as big an ******* as me." Yes, you ARE pretty tall, Gene (but you're not pretty AND tall)! ;)
I hear what you are saying, but I think the difference in our views is this: What you accuse "modern masters" of is legitimate, (here is where we differ) but I don't think you realize that some of the older, now-respected masters were accused of EXACTLY the same thing by their contemporary counterparts in the other ryu a long time ago.
Example: Funakoshi had a huge problem with Ohtsuka and accused him of this very thing - the audacity of Ohtsuka changing the kata from the way Funakoshi taught him, and *gasp* changing the name from "heian" back to "pinan." And then, to add insult to injury, adding jujitsu technique to the curriculum AND kata, and worse yet - instituting competitive kumite. Funakoshi once stated that it was a strange combination, not "worthy" of being called either karate or jujitsu. He also seemed to have a problem with such a young man being so audacious as to buck tradition and "improve" upon things, with what Funakoshi saw as very little experience in any art (in spite of his menkyo, which I think he got when he was about 19 years old or so, just prior to studying with Funakoshi). Pretty much your same complaint now.
Here's an irony: Most of the Okinawan masters accused Funakoshi of the very same thing - and not just with the kata. They felt he got way too far away from the traditional roots by "watering down" the instruction for school kids, "inventing" the ten-no-kata, and other innovations.
I also believe the founder of Shito was also a Funakoshi student. How much different is that ryu from Shotokan? Why did that upstart feel the need to break from the Funakoshi "tradition" and start his own ryu?
Funakoshi did not even agree with the whole concept of "ryu" - he felt "fu" was more accurate. He said karate was karate, nothing should be changed - in spite of him being one of the most flagrant violators to do so. He once stated that it was him, an "expert" of karate, who could not even recognize the various ryu of karate he was observing and never heard of, and that he was "embarrassed" that karate had been so perverted into so many styles. And this was a lllllooooonnnngggg time ago, not in the US, and not during current times.
Now of course you have the Shotokan, the Shotokai, and also various fragmented Wado groups. The process continues.
Should I go into the extreme stylistic differences of the various well-known Aikido factions now? Tomiki was a pariah, for starters! Many well-respected aikido sensei have broken with tradition and done such crazy-a$$ed things as institute randori, one of the HUGEST violations of "tradition" in the martial arts I can think of. That goes TOTALLY against one of Ueshiba's basic TRADITIONAL principles. Oh yeah, and there is the small matter of Ueshiba making some significant changes to what Takeda taught him.......and the process continues.
Pretty much your same complaint.
Don't you see the same pattern here?
Jeff Cook
I stand by what I said. Funakoshi was a lightweight who mucked up the kata to please the Japanese. He probably did not even know most of the applications. No, the founder of Shito ryu (Mabuni) was not a Funakoshi student. He trained under Itosu and Higaonna. Mabuni had forgotten more karate than Funakoshi ever knew. No one I know in Okinawan karate takes Funakoshi seriously other than to respect him for his work spreading karate to Japan. He was a nice man. Again, the traditional ryu are remarkably consistent across the board. But, if you come to an Okinawan practitioner and cite Funakoshi as a source you will not be taken seriously. PS I don't know how the aikido guys deal with that. You'll have to ask them.
I am not addressing martial arts. I don’t care about martial arts. I want to address BuDo.
I am curious about people who profess to practice ‘traditional’ methods of BuDo yet at the same-time profess that the belief system held by the founders of their RyuHa was ‘flim-flam’.
I don’t know what kind of Jujutsu you guys do. Is it gendai Budo, Koryu, homegrown American Jujutsu? Is there a belief system do you have a school philosophy etc... I don’t know. I don’t care.
I want address people who practice methods taught by men such as Doshin So, Ueshiba, Miyagi, Kano, etc……. Men who had beliefs and philosophies who’s current generations seem to be either afraid to address or just think there founder may have been full of crap.
PS : Ki may just the start. Ki just happens to be an easy hot button issue. There other issues.... Issues that used to sort of define what BuDo and BuJutsu were.
OK. I will give it a go. I study and teach Kodokan Judo. I began in 1967 in the Phoenixville YMCA. Our club was a brown belt club, the regular instructors were a Nikyu and a Sankyu. This was very common at the time as black belts were rare as hen's teeth. Once or twice a month they would travel to Ishikawa's club in Philly, and bring back to us what they learned. Once every 6 to 8 weeks a very good Sandan would drop in and teach class. The class was full of white americans, taught by white americans. We started and ended every class with a kneeling bow. We started and ended our training with our partners with a standing bow. We learned the japanese names for the throws and holds, we did randori and kata and self defense applications. I learned about Sierokyo Zenyo and Jita Kyoei and we observed these principles in class. Later I tried to follow these outside of class. We bowed as we entered the dojo and left, on and off the mat.
Today I try to teach as I learned with some changes. I stress Seirokyo Zenyo and Jita Kyoei to the class. I try to teach the full syllabus of judo, throws and grappling, for health and self defense. We randori and occasionally enter shiai.
I tell the class that Dr. Kano wanted judo to a method for self improvement so that the individual and society would improve. I do this without any mention of religion, I myself am Catholic and we train in a Catholic church basement.
In my small way I carry on what I know how to do. I cannot pass on what I do not possess. We all have had different learning experiances in the arts, so we all will pass on something different to our students. I believe I am respecting judo as it was formulated by Kano. And I do this gladly as I know what benefits I have received from studying it.
Peace
Dennis
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 16:08
I stand by what I said. Funakoshi was a lightweight who mucked up the kata to please the Japanese. He probably did not even know most of the applications. No, the founder of Shito ryu (Mabuni) was not a Funakoshi student. He trained under Itosu and Higaonna. Mabuni had forgotten more karate than Funakoshi ever knew. No one I know in Okinawan karate takes Funakoshi seriously other than to respect him for his work spreading karate to Japan. He was a nice man. Again, the traditional ryu are remarkably consistent across the board. But, if you come to an Okinawan practitioner and cite Funakoshi as a source you will not be taken seriously. PS I don't know how the aikido guys deal with that. You'll have to ask them.
Dennis and I cross posted.
Ed, you brought up a good topic of discussion. Don't whimp out and run away crying because I am disagreeing with you on some points. It is a very worthy topic of discussion, and part of this discussion is defining exactly where you, I, Gene, and everyone is coming from and what we are trying to say. That is part of the discussion process. I do apologize if my rather candid way of communication has come across abrasively. If it is, let me know so I can make some adjustments. I am sure Gene can give me some advice on that! ;)
Your quote, "Should a practitioner who doesn’t want to hold true to the teaching principles found in his/her Ryu resign? Should he/she go out and form their school and make themselves Grandmaster founder of whatever it is they really believe in? Is that what Jeff did? If people did this would they no longer have a RyuHa to hold true to so couldn’t they just do what whatever they want? Perhaps they should not market it as “traditional’ Japanese BuDo but beyond that what the hey, it seems like an appropriate road to me."
Again, good questions. Since you ask "is that what Jeff did," I will answer you. That is not exactly what my path has been. I trained in a few (what I considered) very traditional arts. My senseis moved away. Another one died. Students who remained asked me if I would continue to teach. I did, as well as continued to train. I continued to teach the various traditions of the various schools I trained under, the best way I knew how - all the stuff in my brain, heart and body - in my dojo. Thus I describe my teaching as based upon the traditions, methods and techniques of what I have learned in various schools. I did not rank myself, and was totally unconcerned with rank. My method of teaching became popular to a small number of people, and I was asked to go teach at other schools, give seminars at various places around the country. No advertising, no money-making, just people who knew me and been on the mat with me wanted me to do this for them. So I have, for no monetary gain whatsoever. Then some organizations asked me to join, I liked what they could do for my students, I joined, and they ranked me with where they were comfortable to do so, after extensive observation and examination.
I do this stuff because I love it and it keeps me sane. But I also make it VERY clear when I am teaching something from a certain tradition, to remain honest and loyal to the folks who trained me.
(I did not feel that you were questioning my credentials, but you brought up some good points, you asked what my background is, so hopefully my answer gives you some insight into what I have to say.)
Jeff Cook
Gene, I see your reply above concerning Funakoshi. Thanks for the correction concerning Shito; I was not sure.
I agree for the most part with your opinions regarding this. But I see your opinions as supporting my feelings on this. You feel that way about Funakoshi, but others do not. It is a matter of opinion. My point is, nothing has changed. The old guys back then had the same arguments that are occuring now. Whether we like it or not, Funakoshi is widely considered a master. He made changes. Ohstuka is widely considered a master. He made changes.
I am only arguing that the process has occured and is still occuring. I am not really arguing the merits of the process.
Jeff Cook
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 16:18
Gene, I see your reply above concerning Funakoshi. Thanks for the correction concerning Shito; I was not sure.
I agree for the most part with your opinions regarding this. But I see your opinions as supporting my feelings on this. You feel that way about Funakoshi, but others do not. It is a matter of opinion. My point is, nothing has changed. The old guys back then had the same arguments that are occuring now. Whether we like it or not, Funakoshi is widely considered a master. He made changes. Ohstuka is widely considered a master. He made changes.
I am only arguing that the process has occured and is still occuring. I am not really arguing the merits of the process.
Jeff Cook
Funakoshi is widely considered a master in Shotokan circles. He is granted respect in others. Everything is not a matter of opinion; that is total relativism. Dig up some of the stories about Motobu and Funakoshi and Motobu's scorn for him. Not pretty.
Cliff Hargrave
02-10-2006, 16:23
My opinion as an outsider on this:
After reading the entire thread I can't help but thinking "Who cares?"
Some people like to treat Budo as "something you are" and some don't. I believe someone can train in a Budo art, stay true to the tradition and orthodoxy of the techniques, and not give a dang one way or another about Ki. Just because the Asian dude that started the style believed or taught it doesn't mean it is needed. If people want to adopt a style's religion or spirituality then go for it, but it isn't a requirement for keeping the art "pure." It is completely separate cultural baggage that was interwoven into it.
This is one of the reasons I don't train in a "Budo" art any longer. Too much finger pointing and elitism.
Budo isn't dead, but I view it as an anachronism.
Gene, again I agree. But I see this as an issue of total relativism. Tradition is not absolute; efficacy of any ryu is not absolute. None of these things have any significance except when related to each other, and related to the lives of the budoka it affects in a positive way.
As you say, the Shotokan folks consider him a master. Other circles do not. That is a completely self-contained definition of relativism; opinions are not an absolute statement of fact. Motobu's scorn for Funakoshi is, again, Motobu's opinion - a relativistic evaluation of what he has observed.
I guess I am not sure where you are going with the relativity thing. Help me out here.
Jeff Cook
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 16:29
Gene, again I agree. But I see this as an issue of total relativism. Tradition is not absolute; efficacy of any ryu is not absolute. None of these things have any significance except when related to each other, and related to the lives of the budoka it affects in a positive way.
As you say, the Shotokan folks consider him a master. Other circles do not. That is a completely self-contained definition of relativism; opinions are not an absolute statement of fact. Motobu's scorn for Funakoshi is, again, Motobu's opinion - a relativistic evaluation of what he has observed.
I guess I am not sure where you are going with the relativity thing. Help me out here.
Jeff Cook
I was just responding to your statement that everything is a matter of opinion. It really isn't. There are some absolutes, and tradition is more than just a matter of opinion.
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 16:32
My opinion as an outsider on this:
After reading the entire thread I can't help but thinking "Who cares?"
Some people like to treat Budo as "something you are" and some don't. I believe someone can train in a Budo art, stay true to the tradition and orthodoxy of the techniques, and not give a dang one way or another about Ki. Just because the Asian dude that started the style believed or taught it doesn't mean it is needed. If people want to adopt a style's religion or spirituality then go for it, but it isn't a requirement for keeping the art "pure." It is completely separate cultural baggage that was interwoven into it.
This is one of the reasons I don't train in a "Budo" art any longer. Too much finger pointing and elitism.
Budo isn't dead, but I view it as an anachronism.
Most of the time, I don't give a steaming pile of cat feces either, I just train and teach my students. But, I get so effing tired of the same old standard cliches from non-karate people about, "opinion," "innovation,"it's all relative," when, frankly, they don't know what the canine intercourse they are talking about.
Most of the time, I don't give a steaming pile of cat feces either, I just train and teach my students. But, I get so effing tired of the same old standard cliches from non-karate people about, "opinion," "innovation,"it's all relative," when, frankly, they don't know what the canine intercourse they are talking about.
Gene, it just might be possible that you are so deafened by elitist dogma that you don't know what you are hearing or what they are saying. But there are an awful lot of us ignorant dumbasses out there too. ;)
Keep trying to make me smarter.
Jeff Cook
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 16:54
Gene, it just might be possible that you are so deafened by elitist dogma that you don't know what you are hearing or what they are saying. But there are an awful lot of us ignorant dumbasses out there too. ;)
Keep trying to make me smarter.
Jeff Cook
I know damn well what they are saying. It is interesting to me that in a karate thread where traditionalists are discussing anything, modern martial artists and innovators always want to jump in with the same old tired crap and question "tradition," "effectiveness," etc. It is like they want to be taken seriously by traditionalists, but they don't want to go the whole route...like the soldier who wants to be in the Army but he doesn't want to march. Hell, we take you seriously as martial artists, just not as traditionalists.
:)
Jason T Gatts
02-10-2006, 17:02
"we take you seriously as martial artists, just not as traditionalists."
I like that.
I want address people who practice methods taught by men such as Doshin So, Ueshiba, Miyagi, Kano, etc……. Men who had beliefs and philosophies who’s current generations seem to be either afraid to address or just think there founder may have been full of crap. I completely agree with Ed's assesment, here.
The fear is simple, most people are educated to believe that spiritual beliefs are the sign of an uneducated mind, or if the person persists in these beliefs of an inferior one. People then shy away from it almost catharticly.
Additionally, there is a big difference in spiritual concepts as explained by people like Ed speaks of and those explained by people not trained or educated in their elements. Many people confuse supernatural and superstition concepts with spiritual ones.
I am not, of course, a spiritual master. However, it is apparent to me that a relaxed and alert state of mind increases awareness of my surrondings. Furthermore, by studied concentration and controlled willpower, I can manifest changes in my body, e.g heart rate, that allow me to be more receptive of environmental inputs. Also, if I RELAX! I can find positions for my body that greatly increase my effectiveness as a martial artist. As I improve in this way, I can sense not only externally, but internally as well.
This could be explained as ki. Why not? It may appear supernatural, but it is not anymore than fire to the savage. I do think we are teaching people to close their minds to things that prevent them from investigating them for fear of being ridiculed.
AS far as Gene's issue: The kata have obviously been changed by people creating their own styles. Those people who dare to do such things, e.g. Otsuka of Wado, have to be able to prove over and over that their modifications were valid. Karate is still very young in that there are people still living who trained under some of the founders of the current styles. If the new styles are valid there will be enough interest in them that they will survive another generation and grow through study and mastery by the students. I think that Cliff and Jeff may be talking about the difference between 'Do" and "jutsu". In any case, the physics and physiology must be accurate or it all fails.
Did I make a mess?
Cliff Hargrave
02-10-2006, 18:24
The fear is simple, most people are educated to believe that spiritual beliefs are the sign of an uneducated mind, or if the person persists in these beliefs of an inferior one. People then shy away from it almost catharticly.
Well that is not entirely true, you also have to take into consideration that their spiritual beliefs may be just different. Our country is mostly Christian and they tend to shy away from Eastern religions.
I know damn well what they are saying. It is interesting to me that in a karate thread where traditionalists are discussing anything, modern martial artists and innovators always want to jump in with the same old tired crap and question "tradition," "effectiveness," etc. It is like they want to be taken seriously by traditionalists, but they don't want to go the whole route...like the soldier who wants to be in the Army but he doesn't want to march. Hell, we take you seriously as martial artists, just not as traditionalists.
:)
Gee Gene, see if you can untwist your panties out of your exceptionally tight crack for a moment. I happen to be a karate guy too, but perhaps only sandans and above are allowed to have an opinion in this forum? I can see why it would be disturbing to you that a guy who holds dan rank in a few traditional arts may have formed a slightly different opinion (I hear the next argument coming - "you should have stayed in one art long enough to learn the vastly elevated concepts that mere mortals cannot understand and then maybe you will be taken seriously"). I guess it is threatening to the satus quo to have an insider question these things. Oh yeah, let's just label him an outsider instead. Easier to discount and diminish his opinion.
Funny, I don't hear you questioning Tony.
Again, the process and history repeats itself. I just never thought some of those accusations and techniques of elitist exclusion would be sent my way.
Shame on all of those "karate innovators" who are now widely respected master-founders of established traditions. Also, I don't claim to be an innovator. I teach what I was taught, pretty much the way I was taught it.
At any rate, I want to keep this on a friendly level, so I will disengage from the conversation right now. You seem to be getting annoyed, and I don't want to see this devolve. Annoying you was not my intent.
Jeff Cook
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 19:02
Gee Gene, see if you can untwist your panties out of your exceptionally tight crack for a moment. I happen to be a karate guy too, but perhaps only sandans and above are allowed to have an opinion in this forum? I can see why it would be disturbing to you that a guy who holds dan rank in a few traditional arts may have formed a slightly different opinion (I hear the next argument coming - "you should have stayed in one art long enough to learn the vastly elevated concepts that mere mortals cannot understand and then maybe you will be taken seriously"). I guess it is threatening to the satus quo to have an insider question these things. Oh yeah, let's just label him an outsider instead. Easier to discount and diminish his opinion.
Funny, I don't hear you questioning Tony.
Again, the process and history repeats itself. I just never thought some of those accusations and techniques of elitist exclusion would be sent my way.
Shame on all of those "karate innovators" who are now widely respected master-founders of established traditions. Also, I don't claim to be an innovator. I teach what I was taught, pretty much the way I was taught it.
At any rate, I want to keep this on a friendly level, so I will disengage from the conversation right now. You seem to be getting annoyed, and I don't want to see this devolve. Annoying you was not my intent.
Jeff Cook
I would not categorize you as a traditionalist. The blue gi is a dead give away from the git go. Look, I didn't start this crap. There is nothing elitist in anything Ed or I am saying. You have to go over to koryu arts for that. I don't care how many dan you have in how many arts, a "ryu" is not a matter of opinion. There is a clearly defined "syllabus" of kata, a traceable lineage, and an accepted dojo kun. Students do not give me their opinion in the dojo. I do not give Harada mine. The ryu does not change to meet the student's needs. The student conforms to the ryu. Sort of like the Army and the Marine Corps. I never offered my opinion to a Drill Instructor, did you?
On the subject of ki/chi; I never really believed in it, until I watched a documentary about a Buddihst monastery. I belive it was in Tibet. These men could do things, that I could not explain away as tricks or simply good physics. The British team conducting it, couldn't explain it either. I had heard and read stories about ki/chi for most of my life, but after watching this show, I now believe that there is something to it. What exactly, I'm not sure.
There have been many people considered masters that have broken away from their "traditions" to form a new style, alter a kata, etc.. I think Jeff C already spoke on this, so I won't list them again. What makes a tradition unalterable? Now obviously there are certain things you keep for the sake of discipline. Otherwise your martial art becomes a McDojo. But take for example, the gi. As Gene posted earlier, he believes that only an all white gi is proper. I've seen Okinawan masters wear a black top and white pants as does our school. (And we wear two patches) I've seen an Okinawan master whom I respect very much wear a solid black gi. Does this make them rebels against tradition?? The gi itself, was it not introduced into karate by Funakoshi as well as the belt rank system? That would mean it's been a tradition less than 100 years. Is it the age that makes a tradition unalterable? Is it respect for the person that instituted it? What is the criteria to make something a tradition? And what makes it worth keeping?
I would not categorize you as a traditionalist. The blue gi is a dead give away from the git go. Look, I didn't start this crap. There is nothing elitist in anything Ed or I am saying. You have to go over to koryu arts for that. I don't care how many dan you have in how many arts, a "ryu" is not a matter of opinion. There is a clearly defined "syllabus" of kata, a traceable lineage, and an accepted dojo kun. Students do not give me their opinion in the dojo. I do not give Harada mine. The ryu does not change to meet the student's needs. The student conforms to the ryu. Sort of like the Army and the Marine Corps. I never offered my opinion to a Drill Instructor, did you?
As BJJ is an art that is still very young, I would not classify a blue gi as non traditional for them. It is my understanding that a blue or white gi are the only two that are widely accepted. It has a traceable lineage. I believe a general syllabus of technique since they don't have kata. And etiquette.(I have never trained at a school where tthey used a lot of Japanese terms. So I am assuming that is what dojo kun is, isn't it?)
I am unsure of where the giving of opinion in the dojo came into this. I must have missed that part. :D While I don't plan on changing an entire style, anytime I have question or comment on the style I've studied at the time, I asked. Not on the dojo floor, but in private.
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 20:27
As BJJ is an art that is still very young, I would not classify a blue gi as non traditional for them. It is my understanding that a blue or white gi are the only two that are widely accepted. It has a traceable lineage. I believe a general syllabus of technique since they don't have kata. And etiquette.(I have never trained at a school where tthey used a lot of Japanese terms. So I am assuming that is what dojo kun is, isn't it?)
I am unsure of where the giving of opinion in the dojo came into this. I must have missed that part. :D While I don't plan on changing an entire style, anytime I have question or comment on the style I've studied at the time, I asked. Not on the dojo floor, but in private.
We are talking about karate, not BJJ. Most karate ryu wear white gi, black is worn by some. I was emphasizing that to make the point that you don't just do what you, by God, please in a traditional ryu. Many things have lineage...horse racing, dog breeding, wine making, and chess. That doesn't make them karate.
Cliff Hargrave
02-10-2006, 21:03
I think this thread strayed a little farther away from Ed's orginal post, or I am not following this well? Wasn't he referring to beliefs and traditions of our Ryu-Ha founders and Ki? I don't know how this ended up with people changing arts to suit themselves.
I took the orginal question to mean "can you be a traditionalist with the just the physical aspect of the art?" My opinion is yes, you don't have to believe in the esoteric to keep the Ryu traditional.
I don't know how this ended up with Funakoshi and blue gis. Besides, you Okinawan guys should be training in khakis and no shirt anyway. :)
I think this thread strayed a little farther away from Ed's orginal post, or I am not following this well? Wasn't he referring to beliefs and traditions of our Ryu-Ha founders and Ki? I don't know how this ended up with people changing arts to suit themselves.
Me neither. But I was commenting anyway. :D
I took the orginal question to mean "can you be a traditionalist with the just the physical aspect of the art?" My opinion is yes, you don't have to believe in the esoteric to keep the Ryu traditional.
I agree.
I don't know how this ended up with Funakoshi and blue gis. Besides, you Okinawan guys should be training in khakis and no shirt anyway. :)
what about the underwear some of the masters are wearing in pictures while doing Sanchin?? :eek:
Gene Williams
02-10-2006, 21:19
what about the underwear some of the masters are wearing in pictures while doing Sanchin?? :eek:
I think the underwear should be brighter :D
We are talking about karate, not BJJ. Most karate ryu wear white gi, black is worn by some. I was emphasizing that to make the point that you don't just do what you, by God, please in a traditional ryu. Many things have lineage...horse racing, dog breeding, wine making, and chess. That doesn't make them karate.
I thought we're discussing tradition in general.
Cliff, I think you are on message and I also think the variety of answers shows how the dialectic of martial arts works. Everyone changes it whether they want to or not. I ask foregiveness (That is not a misspelling, but a sort of pun) for the following statement: Funakoshi was not a very well educated man and seems to have made some factual mistakes as well as changes in what he created. This means that if someone attempts to follow him, even if they could mimic him perfectly, they would either be in error, too or have to change to be factually correct. This takes nothing away from what he gave the world, but actually shows that a person could be a good martial artist and not follow tradition or even facts.
Now my point about educating spirituality out of people is not about East versus West, although that is a very good point Cliff made. I have seen at least two instances of good people of concience quitting a school because they believed it was incorrect to bow before anyone but G-d. I can only respect that decision. The cultural trappings of Asian martial arts contains religious elements just as does many Western cultural traditions, although bowing is not nessecarilly one of them. So people of faith can have hurdles to mount as the devout agnostic when confronted with a subject like 'ki'. It is my experience that this is not a religous issue, however but more a world view. Some could call it philosophy but I think, and apparently Gene could shed more light on this, it more correctly called Theosophy.
So should people attempt to understand the mental workings of the karate masters? Yes, but from more than a epistimological stance. Should they convert to Buddhism, or Shitoism, etc.? No, because it is not neccessary to understand the master's copncepts and beliefs concerning the immutable relationships of martial artists and the universe and its actors.
Reading this thread you can see the concern that runnig a form with a yoko keagi geri in place of a mae geri can generate. It is just as important to people to be careful how they treat their spiritual growth as well. Once that problem is solved the learning will take a specific path. Outwardly, the martial artist can be very good whether they allow a spiritual element or not, but it will be very different.
Now my point about educating spirituality out of people is not about East versus West, although that is a very good point Cliff made. I have seen at least two instances of good people of concience quitting a school because they believed it was incorrect to bow before anyone but G-d. I can only respect that decision.
That's why my girlfriend will not go to the dojo. She doesn't mind me teaching her informally though.
I would not categorize you as a traditionalist. The blue gi is a dead give away from the git go. Look, I didn't start this crap. There is nothing elitist in anything Ed or I am saying. You have to go over to koryu arts for that. I don't care how many dan you have in how many arts, a "ryu" is not a matter of opinion. There is a clearly defined "syllabus" of kata, a traceable lineage, and an accepted dojo kun. Students do not give me their opinion in the dojo. I do not give Harada mine. The ryu does not change to meet the student's needs. The student conforms to the ryu. Sort of like the Army and the Marine Corps. I never offered my opinion to a Drill Instructor, did you?
This isn't "crap" Gene - unless you become thin-skinned and intolerant of discussion.
The blue gi I wear for BJJ and related activities doesn't really have a bit to do with whether I am a "traditionalist" or not. Most of the pics and vids on my website show me in a white or black gi, and besides - you've never been to my dojo. Again, another example of trying to pigeonhole the annoying guy with a different opinion. You may find some pictures around of me wearing a lampshade at a party - but the picture was NOT taken in a karate dojo. And as others pointed out a karate gi of ANY color is NOT TRADITIONAL ANYWAY! It was borrowed from another modern art from Japan, not even Okinawa. You can thank Kano for that. And for some reason the karate guys thought the gi was too thick and too hot to work out in (whah!) so they had to alter it even further, make it "lighter" and "more comfortable." All that clothing while dancing about the floor was too taxing upon them I suppose....;)
So, tradition is not as rigid as it would appear. We can stamp our feet and make proclamations all we want, but I can point to many instances of tradition in karate being highly flexible, highly changeable.
Again, the opinions I am referring to are the opinions of one ryu about another, not opinions within the ryu. This is what I meant when I said your blinders might be inhibiting you from seeing/hearing exactly what is being said.; I would never give a sensei my opinion on his floor. That is ridiculous. But different ryu have different opinions comparitively, thus we have 14 different ways to do kusanku/kankudai/etc. THAT was my point about "opinions."
One last thing Gene - it is o.k. you don't see me as a traditionalist. I understand why. In fact I take great glee in being seen as a nonconformist at times. Sometimes you have to work outside the box occasionally.
Jeff Cook
Gene Williams
02-11-2006, 06:35
Cliff, I think you are on message and I also think the variety of answers shows how the dialectic of martial arts works. Everyone changes it whether they want to or not. I ask foregiveness (That is not a misspelling, but a sort of pun) for the following statement: Funakoshi was not a very well educated man and seems to have made some factual mistakes as well as changes in what he created. This means that if someone attempts to follow him, even if they could mimic him perfectly, they would either be in error, too or have to change to be factually correct. This takes nothing away from what he gave the world, but actually shows that a person could be a good martial artist and not follow tradition or even facts.
Now my point about educating spirituality out of people is not about East versus West, although that is a very good point Cliff made. I have seen at least two instances of good people of concience quitting a school because they believed it was incorrect to bow before anyone but G-d. I can only respect that decision. The cultural trappings of Asian martial arts contains religious elements just as does many Western cultural traditions, although bowing is not nessecarilly one of them. So people of faith can have hurdles to mount as the devout agnostic when confronted with a subject like 'ki'. It is my experience that this is not a religous issue, however but more a world view. Some could call it philosophy but I think, and apparently Gene could shed more light on this, it more correctly called Theosophy.
So should people attempt to understand the mental workings of the karate masters? Yes, but from more than a epistimological stance. Should they convert to Buddhism, or Shitoism, etc.? No, because it is not neccessary to understand the master's copncepts and beliefs concerning the immutable relationships of martial artists and the universe and its actors.
Reading this thread you can see the concern that runnig a form with a yoko keagi geri in place of a mae geri can generate. It is just as important to people to be careful how they treat their spiritual growth as well. Once that problem is solved the learning will take a specific path. Outwardly, the martial artist can be very good whether they allow a spiritual element or not, but it will be very different.
Many theologians see Zen Buddhism as a "quasi-religion" (see Paul Tillich, "Christianity and the Encounter with World Religions"). There is absolutely nothing wrong with Christians bowing in a dojo. It is like saluting in the military. Zen does not have a "god" as such. It is a very practical, meditative method of living from day to day. The whole issue of martial arts being in conflict with Christianity is a huge straw man made by snake tossing, poison drinking, Biblically illiterate, historically illiterate, misguided people down at St. John's-by-the-Gas-Station. Is one's Christianity so weak that it needs defending from a dojo shrine? Is one's faith so brittle that it can't handle any encounter with other cultures? Does God need our help THAT much?
Gene Williams
02-11-2006, 06:41
This isn't "crap" Gene - unless you become thin-skinned and intolerant of discussion.
The blue gi I wear for BJJ and related activities doesn't really have a bit to do with whether I am a "traditionalist" or not. Most of the pics and vids on my website show me in a white or black gi, and besides - you've never been to my dojo. Again, another example of trying to pigeonhole the annoying guy with a different opinion. You may find some pictures around of me wearing a lampshade at a party - but the picture was NOT taken in a karate dojo. And as others pointed out a karate gi of ANY color is NOT TRADITIONAL ANYWAY! It was borrowed from another modern art from Japan, not even Okinawa. You can thank Kano for that. And for some reason the karate guys thought the gi was too thick and too hot to work out in (whah!) so they had to alter it even further, make it "lighter" and "more comfortable." All that clothing while dancing about the floor was too taxing upon them I suppose....
So, tradition is not as rigid as it would appear. We can stamp our feet and make proclamations all we want, but I can point to many instances of tradition in karate being highly flexible, highly changeable.
Again, the opinions I am referring to are the opinions of one ryu about another, not opinions within the ryu. This is what I meant when I said your blinders might be inhibiting you from seeing/hearing exactly what is being said.; I would never give a sensei my opinion on his floor. That is ridiculous. But different ryu have different opinions comparitively, thus we have 14 different ways to do kusanku/kankudai/etc. THAT was my point about "opinions."
One last thing Gene - it is o.k. you don't see me as a traditionalist. I understand why. In fact I take great glee in being seen as a nonconformist at times. Sometimes you have to work outside the box occasionally.
Jeff Cook
Jeff, Most traditionalists who want to be recognized as such at least conform to some outward indications of their tradition. True, clothes don't make the man, but they sure help. :D As to the wearing of gi, it has become an accepted standard among karate ryu. Like your uniform, Jeff. Put Mickey Mouse pins on your dress blues instead of your brass and see what kind of reaction you get. :bow:
Jason T Gatts
02-11-2006, 07:49
I don't know if it's odd or not, but throughout this entire thread I've found myself agreeing with both Gene and Jeff - who although they appear at odds seem to me to be in aggreeance (Gene sees Jeff as a Martial Artist but not a Traditionalist and Jeff admits that he understands why).
I think that part of the problem with this discussion (for me at least) is that we all speak as if we have the exact same understanding of all the terms and titles we use. In this age of Martial Arts, Martial Sports, Martial Sciences; "traditional", "modern", "combat", "American"; hybrid, mixed (you get the idea)- it's hard to believe that we're all on the same sheet of music.
I used to believe that the term Martial Artist (sometimes preceeded by true or real) was synonomous with "traditional" but I came to the realization pretty recently that in most people's minds I'm probably not a "traditional" martial artist, even though I had always believed that I was (I'm currently training in the traditional art of Shorin-ryu but all of the advanced rank that I hold would certainly be questioned by traditionalists).
I know that I'm going to start getting off topic here, but what I'm getting at is that with all the criteria - lineage, uniforms, lack of change, etc., where does it end and what are the priorities. In one of the styles that I studied I have a relatively short and direct lineage (only 3 teachers from the founder) but if each of those teachers changed things to suit themselves, how important is that short lineage? This is where I wish that we could all be on the same page because if my instructor and I had the same understanding of what we were doing and the same definition of terms I could probably still be training with him today instead of parting on not so pleasant of terms after so many years of training together.
Would the founder care more about lack of change or effectiveness?
Would he rather see his students get beat up and say "That looks just like the way I taught it" or would he rather see his students succeed and say "Beautiful innovation"?
I'd just like to say that I would be honored to train with either Jeff or Gene, but because of the position that I currently find myself in I especially wish that there had been someone like Gene in my area when I began my training.
I also wonder how many people (right now) that are not considered "traditionalists" will be in 30 or 50 years. History shows that some of them most likely will be.
Does tradition preclude advancement in technology? The blue gi is good example of a simple technology being used to discriminate between players on the dojo. Another example is the hakama. I wear plain black to hide dirt, but in the old days people wore many different colours, stripes, patterns, etc. As much as I like the looks of a Keikogi they are impractical for my grapling style workouts, yet they are traditional for Aikijujutsu practitioners.
The old folks had some traditions because they did not have access to the technology to change some things, or change in materials, textiles, etc was slower than the current period.
When I was young a teacher told us that the Japanese had a saying, "Adopt, Adapt, Adept." Perhaps change is part of the tradition, too, like a Hegelian dialectic.
Gene and Jason, good posts.
Gene, I am enlisted; I cannot afford dress-blues. ;) Your "accepted standard" statement is EXACTLY what I am talking about! A great example of a non-traditional standard being accepted. Perfect! Also, I don't necessarily want to be seen as a traditionalist, but some see me as a traditionalist. You can line up five sensei in my dojo, have them watch me conduct the same session, and get five different opinions. I like that.
Your comments about Zen, Christians bowing, etc, was right on the money. That is a pet-peeve of mine, one that used to drive me nuts, having been a former member of the "Christian Karate Association....."
Jason,
Gene and I pretty much see things eye-to-eye; I think sometimes we just don't realize it, due to the fact that we miscommunicate some of our thoughts. I appreciate your respectful comments about training with either of us. Frankly, if I had someone of Gene's caliber available to me as a sensei way-back-when when my other sensei left/died, I would have remained along that path. But crap happens, and we do what we have to do, and what I have done to fill the void for me has worked out pretty well so far. And my students, all of who have time in other dojos before mine, tell me the same thing.
Jeff Cook
Richard, I just saw your post now while we were cross-posting. Great points!
Jeff Cook
Gene Williams
02-11-2006, 08:10
Gene and Jason, good posts.
Gene, I am enlisted; I cannot afford dress-blues. ;) Your "accepted standard" statement is EXACTLY what I am talking about! A great example of a non-traditional standard being accepted. Perfect! Also, I don't necessarily want to be seen as a traditionalist, but some see me as a traditionalist. You can line up five sensei in my dojo, have them watch me conduct the same session, and get five different opinions. I like that.
Your comments about Zen, Christians bowing, etc, was right on the money. That is a pet-peeve of mine, one that used to drive me nuts, having been a former member of the "Christian Karate Association....."
Jason,
Gene and I pretty much see things eye-to-eye; I think sometimes we just don't realize it, due to the fact that we miscommunicate some of our thoughts. I appreciate your respectful comments about training with either of us. Frankly, if I had someone of Gene's caliber available to me as a sensei way-back-when when my other sensei left/died, I would have remained along that path. But crap happens, and we do what we have to do, and what I have done to fill the void for me has worked out pretty well so far. And my students, all of who have time in other dojos before mine, tell me the same thing.
Jeff Cook
I wish you would bring your *** up here to train sometime. I come to Orlando several times a year and to Pensacola more than that. Orlando is closer to you, I think. Anyway, I don't think our mutual respect is in question. We have just come different routes. I'm working on a post in my head to address some of this from a different angle.
Jeff, Most traditionalists who want to be recognized as such at least conform to some outward indications of their tradition. True, clothes don't make the man, but they sure help. :D As to the wearing of gi, it has become an accepted standard among karate ryu. Like your uniform, Jeff. Put Mickey Mouse pins on your dress blues instead of your brass and see what kind of reaction you get. :bow:
Man, I am an idiot. I tried to post the below as a separate post to your quote above Gene, but somehow I hit the wrong button and ended up editing your original post. I think I got it fixed now, but PLEASE check it to make sure I didn't screw it up. Sorry.
Here's what I wanted to say additionally, based upon your quote above:
I am more concerned with conforming to actions, spirit, and intent than conforming with the mere shell of outward appearance in the form of clothing. Same holds true with your military comparison. I am the same martial artist whether I am in my white gi in the dojo performing a Shinto purification rite in front of the kamiza, or rolling around on the beach in my board shorts with a hot drunk chick and a bottle of Bacardi. I am the same US Army soldier whether I am in my spotless creased uniform or rolling around on the beach in my board shorts with a hot drunk chick and a bottle of Bacardi.
OK, well maybe my drunk-chick-rolling-and-drinking days at the beach are over, but you get my point I hope. ;)
Jeff Cook
I wish you would bring your *** up here to train sometime. I come to Orlando several times a year and to Pensacola more than that. Orlando is closer to you, I think. Anyway, I don't think our mutual respect is in question. We have just come different routes. I'm working on a post in my head to address some of this from a different angle.
I'm running about a step behind you on posts today.
I WILL do that, and I will be quite honored to learn from you old man. I will dig out a white belt and TRY to find a semi-clean white gi so I don't have to listen to you piss and moan about what a circus-freak I am....;) Thanks for your patience, brother.
When are you coming to Orlando and Pensacola next? Perhaps we can get that annoying Democrat, Barry, to join us too.
Jeff Cook
Gene Williams
02-11-2006, 08:46
I'm running about a step behind you on posts today.
I WILL do that, and I will be quite honored to learn from you old man. I will dig out a white belt and TRY to find a semi-clean white gi so I don't have to listen to you piss and moan about what a circus-freak I am....;) Thanks for your patience, brother.
When are you coming to Orlando and Pensacola next? Perhaps we can get that annoying Democrat, Barry, to join us too.
Jeff Cook
No Democrats. :D No TKD...seriously, I have absolutely nothing in common with TKD. I've tried training with them before and it just doesn't work. We are not even close to doing the same thing. Maybe with the HKD we could trade wrist locks or something. :) I don't play with sticks, either. The Okinawan weapons will have to do for me.
Jason T Gatts
02-11-2006, 09:04
Gene, Don't jump to assumptions about all TKD people. Since I left my original Tae Kwon Do instructor (who was an Independent-not affiliated with the ITF or the WTF)and have started training Shorin-ryu I've found that what we were doing was much closer to this form of Karate than any of the TKD schools that I've visited over the years. I'm constantly amazed that the things that I demonstrated to TKD teachers around the world and had them tell me "we don't do it like that" is looked at by my Sensei as "pretty close to how we do it". I'm now wondering if "Korean Karate" (I know it's frowned upon) isn't a more accurate description of what I've been doing all these years.
Gene Williams
02-11-2006, 09:09
Gene, Don't jump to assumptions about all TKD people. Since I left my original Tae Kwon Do instructor (who was an Independent-not affiliated with the ITF or the WTF)and have started training Shorin-ryu I've found that what we were doing was much closer to this form of Karate than any of the TKD schools that I've visited over the years. I'm constantly amazed that the things that I demonstrated to TKD teachers around the world and had them tell me "we don't do it like that" is looked at by my Sensei as "pretty close to how we do it". I'm now wondering if "Korean Karate" (I know it's frowned upon) isn't a more accurate description of what I've been doing all these years.
I had a couple of friends years ago in the old ITF who were descended from General Choi that I could actually enjoy doing kata with. They also fought more like karate people. But, those types are very, very few anymore.
I'm headed to the dojo. We'll do more of this later.
SteyrAUG
02-11-2006, 16:03
I had a couple of friends years ago in the old ITF who were descended from General Choi that I could actually enjoy doing kata with. They also fought more like karate people. But, those types are very, very few anymore.
I'm headed to the dojo. We'll do more of this later.
As a general rule I exempt old school TKD from my blanket criticisms of the current Tae Kyor Do schools. I know a couple ROK soldiers who were serious business too.
Brian R. VanCise
02-11-2006, 16:10
Old school TKD is and always has been very strong. Unfortunately
there is not that many around anymore.
Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com
Cliff Hargrave
02-11-2006, 17:58
I have had the pleasure of knowing some "Old School" TKD guys. To me it looked like Shotokan with better kicks. Hard, linear, blast through you stuff. Alot of your 70's and 80's kickboxers were old school TKD. Heck my BJJ instructor was an old school TKD guy and was a world ranked kickboxer in the 70's. In the early 80's TKD took a turn and has never got back on course.
Brian R. VanCise
02-11-2006, 18:11
Hey Cliff,
Old school TKD was basically a shotokan derivative as Gen. Choi
studied Shotokan until 2nd Degree Blackbelt. You are right that
alot of the kickboxers early on were old school TKD guys as well
as old school karate. The Old School TKD can definately be very effective.
Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com
I have had the pleasure of knowing some "Old School" TKD guys. To me it looked like Shotokan with better kicks. Hard, linear, blast through you stuff. Alot of your 70's and 80's kickboxers were old school TKD. Heck my BJJ instructor was an old school TKD guy and was a world ranked kickboxer in the 70's. In the early 80's TKD took a turn and has never got back on course.
Luckily for me, my teacher would be a very "Old School" TKD guy. He trained to Sandan in Shotokan and boxed professionally before devoting himself to TKD.
Definitely an attitude of "hard, linear, blast through you", as you described it, but with a boxer's perspective on footwork. I love that style, and with all of the McDojangs in the Chicago area, I thank God each time I train that I stumbled into this school.
Folks, "old school" TKD still lives...and it's new name is Charles Slade. ;) :D
Gene, Don't jump to assumptions about all TKD people. Since I left my original Tae Kwon Do instructor (who was an Independent-not affiliated with the ITF or the WTF)and have started training Shorin-ryu I've found that what we were doing was much closer to this form of Karate than any of the TKD schools that I've visited over the years. I'm constantly amazed that the things that I demonstrated to TKD teachers around the world and had them tell me "we don't do it like that" is looked at by my Sensei as "pretty close to how we do it". I'm now wondering if "Korean Karate" (I know it's frowned upon) isn't a more accurate description of what I've been doing all these years.
That's the way my TKD instructor was. And he was an ATA instructor. He used to tell us the ATA and TKD were the laughing stock of the martial arts world. I couldn't believe him. His school was the first commercial school I had ever been in. I would think, "we train three hours a night, five days a week. If this is the laughing stock, how hard is everyone else training?" The only teachers I've had that were tougher than him were my father and a Shotokan gentleman that used to teach me. Looking back, Roger taught like an old style karate teacher. He prefered working angles and sidestepping attacks/counter attacks rather than straight line attacks though. After Roger got sent to Bosnia by Uncle Sam, I bounced around several ATA schools and learned why Roger had said those things. I finally ended up at the Shuri-te school I'm at now. I still think about him and wonder what ever happened to him.
As a general rule I exempt old school TKD from my blanket criticisms of the current Tae Kyor Do schools. I know a couple ROK soldiers who were serious business too.
Didn't TKD training used to be standard for South Korean Special Forces?
SteyrAUG
02-12-2006, 01:51
Hey Cliff,
Old school TKD was basically a shotokan derivative as Gen. Choi
studied Shotokan until 2nd Degree Blackbelt. You are right that
alot of the kickboxers early on were old school TKD guys as well
as old school karate. The Old School TKD can definately be very effective.
Brian R. VanCise
www.instinctiveresponsetraining.com
Beat me to it. The original forms were mostly Shotokan kata.
SteyrAUG
02-12-2006, 01:52
Didn't TKD training used to be standard for South Korean Special Forces?
I think it still is.
Jonathan Randall
02-12-2006, 02:07
That's the way my TKD instructor was. And he was an ATA instructor. He used to tell us the ATA and TKD were the laughing stock of the martial arts world. I couldn't believe him. His school was the first commercial school I had ever been in. I would think, "we train three hours a night, five days a week. If this is the laughing stock, how hard is everyone else training?" The only teachers I've had that were tougher than him were my father and a Shotokan gentleman that used to teach me. Looking back, Roger taught like an old style karate teacher. He prefered working angles and sidestepping attacks/counter attacks rather than straight line attacks though. After Roger got sent to Bosnia by Uncle Sam, I bounced around several ATA schools and learned why Roger had said those things. I finally ended up at the Shuri-te school I'm at now. I still think about him and wonder what ever happened to him.
I had a similiar experience back in the early to mid-1980's. The first generation of ATA instructors, in my experience, were generally ex-service members who earned dans while serving in Korea. The head of the ATA school I started in was pretty hard core. He left the ATA though, and his replacement, IMO, only saw dollar signs and easy promotions so I left as well.
Regarding traditionalism, I am very glad that there are still pockets of tradition out there, such as Gene Williams teaches. The martial arts would be so much poorer if everyone and their brother were innovators. Heck, I would have killed (figuratively speaking) to have had access to a traditional Okinawan style sensei when I was starting out. Unfortunately, I would not have known one (or the value of one) then if it had hit me in the face.
Gene Williams
02-12-2006, 06:02
I had a similiar experience back in the early to mid-1980's. The first generation of ATA instructors, in my experience, were generally ex-service members who earned dans while serving in Korea. The head of the ATA school I started in was pretty hard core. He left the ATA though, and his replacement, IMO, only saw dollar signs and easy promotions so I left as well.
Regarding traditionalism, I am very glad that there are still pockets of tradition out there, such as Gene Williams teaches. The martial arts would be so much poorer if everyone and their brother were innovators. Heck, I would have killed (figuratively speaking) to have had access to a traditional Okinawan style sensei when I was starting out. Unfortunately, I would not have known one (or the value of one) then if it had hit me in the face.
If you don't mind my asking, what is your art and what area of the country are you in?
Jonathan Randall
02-12-2006, 19:54
If you don't mind my asking, what is your art and what area of the country are you in?
I'm in Sacramento, CA and currently all I do is some kickboxing twice a week (no-contact right now as I'm having some serious health issues) and a little bag work most evenings. By next year I would like to restart formal training in either JKA Shotokan or Judo (if cleared by my physician). I spent years in KMA but have no interest in returning to them.
many of you have been studying the martial arts for much longer than me, so i am sure your experience provides you with insight that may be beyond me. i have to admit i have learnt loads from posts across the forums by some of you, so cheers for that.
however....the initial post deals with a basic question one can hardly escape, especially given the plethora of self-styled new 'grandmasters' around almost every corner, touting their 'ultimate fighting art'.
i have been practically brought up on martial arts, and taught by sensei who were very traditional in their training. being forced to train with different teachers due to relocating often (and sometimes due to inexplicable inter-organisational politics), i learnt under japanese teachers, teachers from other oriental and south asian countries, and european and american teachers. being a bit headstrong, and given to critical evaluation of everything - largely taught to me by my early sensei - i ran into the touchy issue of tradition with almost all who i had the good fortune to train under. however, to be honest, for me it always seemed like it was a bigger issue with my occidental teachers. without meaning disrespect, i think they were possibly a little touchy about their perceived connection to their chosen art, and overcompensated by almost approaching pedanticism when practising the various aspects of martial tradition they had been taught. maybe my oriental teachers had it easier as they never felt they had to justify why they were practising and teaching an oriental martial art. in any case though, the tradition, which i was taught is the essence of the martial ART was never ignored by them either, though maybe practised with less of an iron fist :) .... i guess that makes sense when you are doing something that is a part of your general cultural heritage, and is in no danger of being perceived as maintaining overtly pretentious relics from a foreign culture.
however, what really bugs me is that so many teachers professing to teach 'traditional' martial arts shroud their 'tradition' in mysticism. the unfortunate result is when practices are confused as having esoteric religious connotations, and people shy away from them as a reult of their own religious beliefs. here, it is important to delineate the difference between philosophy and religion - it was zen that was adopted by martial arts as a suitable philosophy for a warrior...the religion - buddhism - came along with it as default. for example, the practice of zazen is to achieve a different plane of concentration and awareness - the same as an athlete being 'in the zone' in preparation for peak performance. it is NOT an act of paying obeisance to some unknown god. another example discussed here.... the act of bowing to teachers, seniors and each other, is a show of respect, not a renouncement of other religious beliefs. i guess this is a slightly tricky concept for occidental cultures, as overt display of respect in such circumstances is not part of everyday life. the ever-'popular' topic of ki/chi is another pet peeve of mine i guess.... while most of the results achieved from our techniques are - and should be - explainable through our current grasp of science, it is not entirely surprising that not ALL of it can always be explained, simply because modern science has yet to understand the greater portion of human capabilities. ....and i'm a biologist, so yes, there's fact behind that generalisation. the example of traditional medicines being 'rediscovered' by modern science given by Kim earlier is a perfect example of our erstwhile 'snobbishness' when it came to acceptance of things beyond our well-established borders of 'scientific' explanation! just as a side-note, if you are involved in the sciences in any way, you would know that the basic 'method' of proving things to be scientifically untrue is majorly flawed, as all modern science works on the basis that either something can be explained readily, or the explanation is not available yet... as opposed to actually 'disproving' anything!
in response to cliff's early comment about budoka not including tradional aspects in their training... if we reclassify the mistaken esoterism as cultural and philosophical contrariety...then no, one cannot be a budoka and not practice the traditional cultural and philosophical aspects that form part of a martial tradition. it is these that make bujitsu into budo. without these, the practitioner would be doing a martial discipline - which, if it serves your purpose, is great - but he/she would not be a martial ARTIST. i'm not sure, but i think maybe that's what the first post, and what some of gene's replies were about. as an observer though, it seemed interesting to me that inspite of the apparent disagreement with gene, jeff said he believed it was important to stay true to the core values and spirit of the martial art.
it irks me that every other bloke down the road thinks his 5, 10, or even twenty years of 'training' has given him the insight necessary to recognise flaws in an age-old martial art that need rectification. often, if they spent less time trying to figure out what they will change, and instead embrace their learning more, it becomes apparent that the supposed flaws and lack of 'real world effectiveness' are just a result of impaired comprehension arising from a lack of education.
there is also the factor of miscommunication of technique (and tradition) here: as the teaching filters down, things are often left untaught and unlearned, producing a new generation of budoka with an incomplete understanding of the martial art they will soon be propagating. this is especially problematic with our typical three-days-a-week mcdojos churning out students with shiny new black obis, with no real idea what the grade actually signifies (but that's another discussion). here i find myself agreeing rather strongly with gene's emphatic negation of kata changes. if preserved, the kata in a particular system are the last unchanged connection to the intentions of the systems progenitor(s). each is purported to be a complete system of defence and offence, with many of the hidden subtelties being the most effective of the techniques taught therein. i was always pushed to think past what i was taught, question everything, reinterpret anything if i could...this applied to kata as well...but not in the sense that techniques be changed. rather, i was encouraged to find more applications, and alternatives for the ones already taught to me - the 'oyo' behind the 'bunkai'. changing the actual kata would be assuming that in understood every single thing about it in totality, which is not a claim anyone could make lightly, especially given that martial arts is not the only thing we do in our lives. imho, that applies slightly differently to people who made martial arts their life's work from an early age, including funakoshi!
incidentally, richard, just as a point of interest, what leads you to say that funakoshi was not well-educated?
i just think there's more to learning a martial ART than mere technique. without the thought and philosophy behind it (- and NOT the esoterics), it's just mere movement; combinations and sets with only the most bare of applications. it's cool if it serves your purpose, but a MARTIAL ARTIST it does not make. anyway, i guess that's my cupful, for what it's worth.
a question for my betters though.... if there is no variation in interpretation of technique tolerable, how does a style grow? and if there is some tolerance, how does one define what is beyond the boundaries of a particular ryu/style and what is not?
:bow:
sorry for the mega-post...i guess i got a little carried away! hope i didn't mess it up! :o
Jonathan Randall
02-12-2006, 20:29
I'm in Sacramento, CA and currently all I do is some kickboxing twice a week (no-contact right now as I'm having some serious health issues) and a little bag work most evenings. By next year I would like to restart formal training in either JKA Shotokan or Judo (if cleared by my physician). I spent years in KMA but have no interest in returning to them.
I should add that if you know of any Okinawan Dojos with good reputations in my area, I would love to check them out and would appreciate any info you have in that area. Judo is probably out, but there is an inexpensive JKA school that meets at a community college in my area. Also, no offense was intended to KMA's - I just did my time there and want something new, plus nearly all the KMA Dojangs in my area are certifiable, IMO, McDojangs. Even one school that was relatively hardcore when I was there now advertises its affiliation with XMA.
Gene Williams
02-12-2006, 22:05
many of you have been studying the martial arts for much longer than me, so i am sure your experience provides you with insight that may be beyond me. i have to admit i have learnt loads from posts across the forums by some of you, so cheers for that.
however....the initial post deals with a basic question one can hardly escape, especially given the plethora of self-styled new 'grandmasters' around almost every corner, touting their 'ultimate fighting art'.
i have been practically brought up on martial arts, and taught by sensei who were very traditional in their training. being forced to train with different teachers due to relocating often (and sometimes due to inexplicable inter-organisational politics), i learnt under japanese teachers, teachers from other oriental and south asian countries, and european and american teachers. being a bit headstrong, and given to critical evaluation of everything - largely taught to me by my early sensei - i ran into the touchy issue of tradition with almost all who i had the good fortune to train under. however, to be honest, for me it always seemed like it was a bigger issue with my occidental teachers. without meaning disrespect, i think they were possibly a little touchy about their perceived connection to their chosen art, and overcompensated by almost approaching pedanticism when practising the various aspects of martial tradition they had been taught. maybe my oriental teachers had it easier as they never felt they had to justify why they were practising and teaching an oriental martial art. in any case though, the tradition, which i was taught is the essence of the martial ART was never ignored by them either, though maybe practised with less of an iron fist :) .... i guess that makes sense when you are doing something that is a part of your general cultural heritage, and is in no danger of being perceived as maintaining overtly pretentious relics from a foreign culture.
however, what really bugs me is that so many teachers professing to teach 'traditional' martial arts shroud their 'tradition' in mysticism. the unfortunate result is when practices are confused as having esoteric religious connotations, and people shy away from them as a reult of their own religious beliefs. here, it is important to delineate the difference between philosophy and religion - it was zen that was adopted by martial arts as a suitable philosophy for a warrior...the religion - buddhism - came along with it as default. for example, the practice of zazen is to achieve a different plane of concentration and awareness - the same as an athlete being 'in the zone' in preparation for peak performance. it is NOT an act of paying obeisance to some unknown god. another example discussed here.... the act of bowing to teachers, seniors and each other, is a show of respect, not a renouncement of other religious beliefs. i guess this is a slightly tricky concept for occidental cultures, as overt display of respect in such circumstances is not part of everyday life. the ever-'popular' topic of ki/chi is another pet peeve of mine i guess.... while most of the results achieved from our techniques are - and should be - explainable through our current grasp of science, it is not entirely surprising that not ALL of it can always be explained, simply because modern science has yet to understand the greater portion of human capabilities. ....and i'm a biologist, so yes, there's fact behind that generalisation. the example of traditional medicines being 'rediscovered' by modern science given by Kim earlier is a perfect example of our erstwhile 'snobbishness' when it came to acceptance of things beyond our well-established borders of 'scientific' explanation! just as a side-note, if you are involved in the sciences in any way, you would know that the basic 'method' of proving things to be scientifically untrue is majorly flawed, as all modern science works on the basis that either something can be explained readily, or the explanation is not available yet... as opposed to actually 'disproving' anything!
in response to cliff's early comment about budoka not including tradional aspects in their training... if we reclassify the mistaken esoterism as cultural and philosophical contrariety...then no, one cannot be a budoka and not practice the traditional cultural and philosophical aspects that form part of a martial tradition. it is these that make bujitsu into budo. without these, the practitioner would be doing a martial discipline - which, if it serves your purpose, is great - but he/she would not be a martial ARTIST. i'm not sure, but i think maybe that's what the first post, and what some of gene's replies were about. as an observer though, it seemed interesting to me that inspite of the apparent disagreement with gene, jeff said he believed it was important to stay true to the core values and spirit of the martial art.
it irks me that every other bloke down the road thinks his 5, 10, or even twenty years of 'training' has given him the insight necessary to recognise flaws in an age-old martial art that need rectification. often, if they spent less time trying to figure out what they will change, and instead embrace their learning more, it becomes apparent that the supposed flaws and lack of 'real world effectiveness' are just a result of impaired comprehension arising from a lack of education.
there is also the factor of miscommunication of technique (and tradition) here: as the teaching filters down, things are often left untaught and unlearned, producing a new generation of budoka with an incomplete understanding of the martial art they will soon be propagating. this is especially problematic with our typical three-days-a-week mcdojos churning out students with shiny new black obis, with no real idea what the grade actually signifies (but that's another discussion). here i find myself agreeing rather strongly with gene's emphatic negation of kata changes. if preserved, the kata in a particular system are the last unchanged connection to the intentions of the systems progenitor(s). each is purported to be a complete system of defence and offence, with many of the hidden subtelties being the most effective of the techniques taught therein. i was always pushed to think past what i was taught, question everything, reinterpret anything if i could...this applied to kata as well...but not in the sense that techniques be changed. rather, i was encouraged to find more applications, and alternatives for the ones already taught to me - the 'oyo' behind the 'bunkai'. changing the actual kata would be assuming that in understood every single thing about it in totality, which is not a claim anyone could make lightly, especially given that martial arts is not the only thing we do in our lives. imho, that applies slightly differently to people who made martial arts their life's work from an early age, including funakoshi!
incidentally, richard, just as a point of interest, what leads you to say that funakoshi was not well-educated?
i just think there's more to learning a martial ART than mere technique. without the thought and philosophy behind it (- and NOT the esoterics), it's just mere movement; combinations and sets with only the most bare of applications. it's cool if it serves your purpose, but a MARTIAL ARTIST it does not make. anyway, i guess that's my cupful, for what it's worth.
a question for my betters though.... if there is no variation in interpretation of technique tolerable, how does a style grow? and if there is some tolerance, how does one define what is beyond the boundaries of a particular ryu/style and what is not?
:bow:
Well, Bik, all this has been covered here and in other threads. You have answered some of your own questions, anyway. There is plenty of variation in interpretation of technique. That isn't an issue unless it gets too outrageous.
Should AiKiDoKa stop being apologetic for believing in Kokyu and Ki? Should Karate people stop being wishy-washy or apologetic of the idea of kata as moving zen? Should Shorinji Kenshi be proud of their Kongo Zen heritage, should they separate from their Kempo?
Should I have not posted any of this here? I believe so; the idea of trying to kick off a Socratic Dialogue was probably the most ignorant thing I have done this year. There may be others here, but I only know of one guy who has a common frame and know enough about me to know where I am coming from and to understand where I am heading with the dialogue. We talk together by e-mail so I guess there wasn’t any point to it to any of this.
The Aikidoka or anyone who understand what Ki is both philosophically and scientifically need not apologize. You don't need to convince yourself if you know, you just have to teach others a different angle.
I don't know if I believe that kata is moving Zen. I tend to look at kata as a basic template of a ryu's approach to confrontation. Gross motor skills, putting your self in a position to have options, not overly specific analysis and repetition of these lessons; Ingraining mind-body (muscle) memory- that's kata's main lesson to me.
I know of you Ed. You were one of the few sensible cats over at e-budo. I think you have a valid question here. Most so-called traditionalists are not that. Most MAs is crap. MMAs is the further dumbing down of America. Forget art and lets get to the meat of it all- destroying the human body and brain for ducat$$$. I think Matsumura called it Budo of Nominals. Real Scholar-Warriors have seen it throughout time and called it what it was/is: half-stepping -or- failing to see the forest for the trees.
BTW how are your son's Matsumura Seito classes going? What do you think of it as a style? We learned a lot of the intricacies of that term "ki" when I trained with Ronnie. It always made sense to me because he would show you why it made sense. Ki is as real as physics and biomechanics with a tad of an esoteric element thrown in. After all even science can't explain everything. I know this being a trained scientist (and lowly nidan).
Peace bro and keep the music going man....
Gene Williams
02-21-2006, 06:42
The Aikidoka or anyone who understand what Ki is both philosophically and scientifically need not apologize. You don't need to convince yourself if you know, you just have to teach others a different angle.
I don't know if I believe that kata is moving Zen. I tend to look at kata as a basic template of a ryu's approach to confrontation. Gross motor skills, putting your self in a position to have options, not overly specific analysis and repetition of these lessons; Ingraining mind-body (muscle) memory- that's kata's main lesson to me.
I know of you Ed. You were one of the few sensible cats over at e-budo. I think you have a valid question here. Most so-called traditionalists are not that. Most MAs is crap. MMAs is the further dumbing down of America. Forget art and lets get to the meat of it all- destroying the human body and brain for ducat$$$. I think Matsumura called it Budo of Nominals. Real Scholar-Warriors have seen it throughout time and called it what it was/is: half-stepping -or- failing to see the forest for the trees.
BTW how are your son's Matsumura Seito classes going? What do you think of it as a style? We learned a lot of the intricacies of that term "ki" when I trained with Ronnie. It always made sense to me because he would show you why it made sense. Ki is as real as physics and biomechanics with a tad of an esoteric element thrown in. After all even science can't explain everything. I know this being a trained scientist (and lowly nidan).
Peace bro and keep the music going man....
Why do I smell troll here?
Aaron T Fields
02-21-2006, 15:44
No one is seperate from their cultural context nor their time. Many things betweeen culture and time periods get lost in translation. By looking for truth you are in fact, doing what everyone else has done before you. In addition, like everything else that mankind does, there are more similarites than differences. Nothing any of us ever do or think is original, though we may choose to call it something different than those that came before us.
As to the meaning of budo, well that is kind of up to the person involved to take from it what they want.
Finally as there are alwasy goint to be and have been folks who have a more philosophical bent and then those that don't. Nothing is new today, some dojo do, some don't. IN addition, just becasue someone is a qualified combative or combative sport teacher, does not make them qualified to teach many of the other trappings that we so often see wrapped int eh garb of budo.
For me, budo is about struggle with myself and others, and the pursuit of victory in both things.
Aaron Fields
Seattle Jujutsu Club, Hatake Dojo
Sea-Town Sombo
Why do I smell troll here?
Please shut it you master of assumption. What did I say that sounded like trolling?
Gene Williams
02-21-2006, 22:35
Please shut it you master of assumption. What did I say that sounded like trolling?
I understand you have been a nidan for 6 or 8 years. That is a long time. What is the problem? Are you not training? Is there any particular thing that is giving you trouble? Do you have to stop training when you are on your meds? Or do you keep tripping over your mouth?
I shut down one thread because of your bickering.
Lets end it here.
I suggest you both ignore each other. If you can't, take it to PM.
Do not involve everyone on the forum of your dislike for each other.
You both have been warned.
Bryan, Ease up, dude. Check out Gene's 'Title': Cantankerous....". He exerts a certain force to cut through the crap in a way. His way of writing is no so different from yours. Separate the ideas from the person and you can be fairly rough on the board. On the other hand, when the line is crossed ad hominem then the mods get out the Tasers and, well, there has been a public execution here about once every other day for the last week or two.
That’s not a threat by the way, since even Gene has been in and out the door a couple of times.
Talking about Ki, as Ed has tried to do, is almost as exciting as religion and politics. There are several variants of this topic going on right now on this site. When you say you have been trained in ki or related topics, it naturally gets attention and draws out the skeptics.
Think of this as intellectual (sort of) sparring: too much pressure ruins the technique and the training for both people. Gene has pushed back and wants to see what you can do. Do you use technique and skill to read and respond, or stiffen up and dissolve into a shoving match? Even if someone attacks you with poor technique, don't respond in kind for your own growth.
Just FWIW, nothing personal.
Welcome to Budoseek.
The Aikidoka or anyone who understand what Ki is both philosophically and scientifically need not apologize. You don't need to convince yourself if you know, you just have to teach others a different angle.
I don't know if I believe that kata is moving Zen. I tend to look at kata as a basic template of a ryu's approach to confrontation. Gross motor skills, putting your self in a position to have options, not overly specific analysis and repetition of these lessons; Ingraining mind-body (muscle) memory- that's kata's main lesson to me.
I know of you Ed. You were one of the few sensible cats over at e-budo. I think you have a valid question here. Most so-called traditionalists are not that. Most MAs is crap. MMAs is the further dumbing down of America. Forget art and lets get to the meat of it all- destroying the human body and brain for ducat$$$. I think Matsumura called it Budo of Nominals. Real Scholar-Warriors have seen it throughout time and called it what it was/is: half-stepping -or- failing to see the forest for the trees.
BTW how are your son's Matsumura Seito classes going? What do you think of it as a style? We learned a lot of the intricacies of that term "ki" when I trained with Ronnie. It always made sense to me because he would show you why it made sense. Ki is as real as physics and biomechanics with a tad of an esoteric element thrown in. After all even science can't explain everything. I know this being a trained scientist (and lowly nidan).
Peace bro and keep the music going man....
Hi Bryan,
Things are going OK. Hope everything is going good for you. Are you done with med school?
I went through a short period recently when I started posting stuff here. I was home off work a couple of days. I am not actively posting anymore but I saw this and thought I should respond. I log in to see who Gene has riled up.
There is too much a playground mentality here I think. It is not just this site,it is the whole internet thing in general. I have only seen one internet MA forum that works and that is because it is closed to the public and by private invitation only.
You can't learn about Budo on the internet. I think there are some good Kobayashi ShorinKan people that post here but I have probably learned more about ShorinKan from the times I have seen Eddie Bethea or Tom Ward do Kata here and there over the years or the time I walked through a couple of the Yakusoku Kumite drills that Mr Perry teaches then I could ever hope to learn from reading posted stuff. So if one is not posting in order to merely shoot the breeze or in order to make some connections with some form of electronic pen pal then they are probably just wasting their time.
My boy hasn't actively trained since December. He went to the dojo only once in January. We were talked into putting him into a gifted program at special school that the school district has set up. His acedemic load is huge plus he is playing basketball and on a scholastic bowl team. I am little torn about it. He is very intelligent and academics come first but I also think kids should be allowed to be kids. If he stays on his current track he will complete Calculus II before graduating high school. All his subject are stepped up, he is learning a lot more than I did at his age but there is a sizeable cost.
This thread was started during a period where I went crazy and started posting here. I have drastically cut back so I probably won't be active here. The group here is too big.
Like this thread I started. I wanted to target a certain group of practitioners and some of them chimed in with some very good points. Dennis, Richard and Aaron gave me some very good things to think about. Richard is very smart. But you have to deal with all the other noise that comes along with it.
Take care
.... Richard is very smart. ....
There are multiple Richards here. I should clarify I was referring to Richard Goad.
There are multiple Richards here. I should clarify I was referring to Richard Goad.
:o :o Now I have to be nice....
I understand you have been a nidan for 6 or 8 years. That is a long time. What is the problem? Are you not training? Is there any particular thing that is giving you trouble? Do you have to stop training when you are on your meds? Or do you keep tripping over your mouth?
You understand wrong. I got my Shodan from Ron Lindsey in 1 year and my nidan in 2. He is definitely a real karate guy who knows what real karate is. I trained for a couple of years more then I quit for the mean time to start a family. I still train where I live with my bro. Prior to this I trained in Shorinkan (in the Philippines) up to 1st kyu. That took me about 24 months but that was because my sensei wanted me to be at least 17 before he awarded me anything near Shodan. I didn't train for over 13 years stateside because all the karate schools I knew of in SA, Tx. sucked.
If I dedicated my entire life to karate like you did things would be different. That being said I still know more about real Okinawan karate and fighting than you can ever hope to fathom.
I traveled 90 minutes to train twice monthly for 5-7 hours at a time in order to achieve my current rank which was given to me in 2002. I think that 3-4 years combined ( with a switch in ryuha) is pretty good for attaining nidan especially since I didn't train for over a decade.
You need to shut your trap with the assumption, because the only thing rednecks need to ASSume is that they need to check to make sure they wear a belt so their cracks don't show so much. Now go practice your 50 watered down kata, Motobu wanna-be.
I don't even get ill let alone take meds, but I can prescribe you some psychotropics for your magalomania and delusions of grandeur. You have zero idea who you're speaking too, fool.
Like I said you don't know squat. Just shut your trap and hear some truth for once.
Webmaster
02-22-2006, 22:49
Mr. Cyr:
One more little outburst from you and you will find yourself repeating your short experience over at E-Budo. If that is not clear, then contact the Karate Forum moderators.
Rasputin
02-22-2006, 22:50
Flag on the play: character attacks; 10 yard penalty to Brian, 1st down.
Brian, you're new here, so I won't immediately ban you for your ignorance. However, I think I will be creative. You are suspended until I hear from Gene that you have apologized to him for your inappropriate behavior.
Just because you feel you have cause to dislike someone doesn't give you the right to come in here and attack them. Handle it privately or not at all.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.10 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.