Shodokan Karate Form Applications?

we used to practice empty-hand kata while holding chiishi...so maybe kata was designed as a hojo undo? Hey! I could write a book!

Victor,

I have to agree that kobudo for practical purposes is not worthwhile (we cannot carry a sai or bo in London, although there are a lot of guns and knives!) I do not practice kobudo at all these days, as I no longer train with the gentleman who taught it, who also taught karate (in separate classes, not as a hybrid art.) I only mentioned it as it was raised in the forum and, as I have said, I consider it a possibility.

Again I am dredging my memory until I can find time to seek the original information/theory but I think the point was that Jitte was itself a kobudo kata (not an adapted empty hand kata) that somehow ended up in the Shotokan system without an understanding of its original intent, like many kata. I seem to remember reading something similar about Chinte kata but I will research some more before expanding on that. It may of course be nonsense.

In any event, I can see the benefit of training heavy weapon movements if the parallel to some extent empty hand movements.

B.

Kakushiite,

Interesting to know that I am not the only one to have considered Jitte holding a bo (if I have understood you correctly). I look forward to seeing your photos of the kata showing defence and attack with a bo.

B.

Barad,

You are not the only one to think that Jitte can be used holding a bo. Several years ago, 24fightingchickens.com had pictures of Elmer Schmeisser holding a bo in each of the Jitte postures. His argument that it was a hidden bo kata.

My study of the kata leads me to a different view, supporting Nakayama's claim, which I would imagine came from Funakoshi. (Where else would Nakayama have gotten it from?) I believe that fundamentally Jitte is an empty hand kata designed to defend against the bo. But miraculously, as with so many Shorin Ryu kata, it still works with a weapon, and in this case, the bo. To me this gives a yin-yang quality to the kata. Two complementary opposites (empty hand or with bo) providing a completeness. In this case, providing for defense against the bo whether you have one or not.

It is my view that the weapons part requires a fair amount of tweaking to make it work (to have useful applications against another bo, or perhaps sword). In contrast the empty hand applications work pretty much as they are found in the kata. As I noted in my earlier post, regarding what these movements were truly designed for, we can only guess. From the masters (at least in the Itosu line, and to some degree with Kyan's students as well) although we have received the kata, there has been remarkably little instruction handed down on how the movements were to be used. So we should expect that we all would come to different conclusions about how kata movements can be used.

Regarding Nakayama's claim, I find it rather unique. He didn't say that parts of the kata were to be used against a bo. He stated that the kata is for bo defense.

In his books, Nakayama published a lot of kata application. As I have discussed in other threads, I simply can't believe that this is what the masters had in mind when they designed the kata. IMHO, virtually all of it is based of poor fighting principles. But regarding Jitte, we have from Nakayama this kernel of information, almost certainly from Funakoshi, that the kata is for bo defense. In all of Funakoshi's writings (at least those available in English), there is no similar statement, especially one so full of information.

Regarding my videopost, I would do it sooner, but I need some time since I haven't worked the Jitte kata, nor the applications I developed, in years. So I have a bit of practice ahead before posting.

In another post I offered Student_of_Life video of some of my ideas, and he responded "ohhh its like christmas!!". So for Student_of_Life, Merry Christmas.

-Kakushite

woot for HO HO!!!

Just to clarify...it appears that you are talking about ShoTokan.

ShoDokan is a branch of Goju-Ryu created by Higa Seiko.

Best Regards,

Russ

Kakushite,

I've just been watching a few different jitte performances..

I believe I see it's potential as a series of technique insertions into bo attacks. Perhaps that was an older use of Jitte. I also see it's empty hand potential and can see where, following one of my instructors paradigm's, additional techniques complete some of the empty hand usage.

Being outside of my lineage and that I don't focus on empty hand defense against bo or other Okinawan kobudo practices, I can see why I haven't thought on this before.

I can understand what a bo in the performers hands might do while performing jitte, but I still feel it's not a kobudo kata at source. But I would enjoy seeing your interpretaion of that, and would not be disappointed if that changed my mind.

"True" kobudo stylists occasionally critize Isshinryu's kobudo as moving too far away from the original technique. I belive the source of their comments would be that Shimabuku Tatsuo's training was too short to get the 'real stuff'.

Perhaps they're right, but performing the Isshinryu kobudo curricula does most definately increase the power use of our empty hand technique in application as they decades pass. Even more so as the base remains Isshinryu.

The addition of kobudo into karate as been a rather swift infusion. I think we're still sorting its potential out.

You have many different lineages and Jitte might have been developed for countering bo, but consider how long ago that was?

I've read that the turn of 1900, the police and court logs from Okinawa show almost no crime of note. Karate studies before that were very small groups of people. As it seems most of todays karate practices solidified from the mid 1800's onward, in a period where people weren't really attacking each other with weapons (except perhaps for an antidotal story), if jitte was developed specifically for countering bo usage, it has to have been in a very distant past.

Perhaps in the end we can only understand the progenitors of today did their job really well and left no clues by their design.

We wonder and probe don't we?

the history i've herd about jitte, is that jitte, jion, and one ji-type kata all came from a temple and a monk, who the kata were named after. but, then again the history i've herd is most likely just as authentic as what the rest of you have herd.

but if this is true in the smallest sense, maybe some research into the monk jion and his temple would help. unless i have been beaten to the punch again and this subject has already been researched.

have you herd anything like this victor??

yours in life

student,

John Sells Unante describes Jitte, Jion and Jiin as being found in Kobayashi, Shito and Shotokan. The origins have stories about temple or monk origins but nothing that can be verified. The Demura article on Jiin and the Yamashita article on Jion from the 70's do not explain their history. Tony Annesi's text on the 3 kata roughly covers the same ground but also mentions the Wado folks use them too.

Back to my assertion the seniors did their job right and made sure nobody could ascertain the truth.

P.S. Something tells me we should be getting paid for discussing and sharing this in public <GRIN>

Kakushite,

You're responses are thoughtful and filled with information as well.

I found the idea of bo as prepartion for bayonette training interesting.

Funakoshi was working in Japan in the pre-war, or early Japanese conquest years, but there's no record he shared bo as pre-military skill development.

The apparent rise of kobudo systems within family or very local groups does not seem to have influenced preparation for military training by including bo studies from what I've read.

The thought is fascinating, but was it acted upon and used that way?

Just asking,

Victor,

Kobayashi systems (at least the systems that descend from Nakazato, Higa and Miyahira) practice Jion only, not Jiin or Jitte. Regarding Wado, it is a derivative of both Shotokan and Shito Ryu, and so has Jitte and Jion. I neglected to include Wado Ryu because I was only discussing the kata of Itosu students of which Ohtsuka was not one. Of arts that descend directly from Itosu’s students, I believe Jiin and Jitte are practiced only by Shotokan and Shito Ryu. That neither Chibana nor Toyama systems practice Jitte and Jiin make me wonder if one or both may have come from Azato rather than Itosu, or perhaps one of the other masters Funakoshi studied with. (In My Way of Life, he mentions studying under Kiyuna, Toonno, Niigaki, as well as Matsumura. p.13.)

One thing I find interesting regards the sources of kata. Kyan shared with us which masters taught him which kata. On the other hand, Funakoshi only partially does that. He says that during 10 years of training with Itosu, he learned only the three Naihanchi kata. But he never catalogs which other kata he may have learned from Itosu and which from Azato or other masters. If Funakoshi did learn Jitte (and/or Jiin) from some other master, it would not be surprising to me if shared the kata with Mabuni, the great kata collector.

Regarding the concept of bo defense for military training, I do not believe that this would have been something important to Funakoshi. I think the opposite. Although the Japanese military conquests did not begin until Funakoshi was in Japan for 12-13 years, I imagine he found the Japanese attack on Nanking, and its staggering loss of life to be unsettling. IMHO, I can’t imagine a peaceful scholar such as Funakoshi would have wanted to enhance the skills of the Japanese military in any way whatsoever.

Rather, I think that Itosu, who had such a key role in introducing karate to a broader community, may have been more concerned with this. With this in mind, he may have chosen to pass down techniques in kata that could be used for this purpose.

But this gets back to your point regarding the fundamental lack of transmission of application for kata. I imagine it was always that way. You would be taught a kata and after you practiced it for years, you should be able to decipher the movements for yourself. (Itosu tells us this in his 6th lesson of to-te). If a student weren’t able to develop much, then perhaps they would need to practice the kata another few thousand times.

I have an idea regarding how masters might have revealed a kata's secrets, while transmitting virtually nothing. I have no historical basis for this, so I indeed recognize that the following is pure speculation. But this is how I imagine that students might have been introduced to a kata's great capability.

We all know that if we are shown a large number of applications, especially quickly, say in a demo, our senses get overwhelmed and we forget almost everything. (Thank goodness for video cameras.) Also we all know that if we are acting as uke and techniques are done against us, especially rapidly, that it is hard to see just what is going on as we are on the receiving end, getting hit, trapped, locked, and taken down. We are more concerned in ensuring a good attack than with what follows.

So I speculate the following may have occurred. Itosu or Azato, having fully mastered a kata like Jitte, would teach this kata to Funakoshi, and make him practice it thousands of times. Only then, would they ask Funakoshi to pick up the bo and attack them with all sorts of different attacks. They would respond in rapid fire, using the many combinations to defend against the bo. These masters would be lightning quick, and the combinations would be instantaneous.

In the end, Funakoshi would come away, well knowing that the kata had great depth. But he would likely be able to recall very little of what had just been thrown at him.

Whether he was then able to re-engineer any of what he was shown is a matter of speculation. He probably may have come up with a few ideas, maybe what he had seen, maybe some of his own creation. It is all irrelevant, since Funakoshi chose to pass down so little in the way of complex application.

We can all speculate on why Funakoshi did not choose to share sophisticated kata-based fighting applications with his students. Maybe he was taught a great deal, and excelled at developing great kata applications and of this great knowledge, he decided not to teach much. On the other hand, maybe he learned kata, but was not shown much application, and never endeavored to figure out useful applications. We can never know. To me, this is all irrelevant.

IMO, Funakoshi believed the art was for something other than fighting. If one trained really hard (and his students did so) even in the absence of sophisticated kata applications, one would still greatly improve his fighting ability. But what was important to Funakoshi, as with many masters, was that the study of the art was to improve the character. The less “fighting” he taught, the less that bullies would want to train. Rather, only those truly dedicated to the art would remain to train.

IMO, Funakoshi likely trained in a system of endless kata with little or no sophisticated application taught. Although he may have later attained great knowledge, he ultimately decided to pass on his art the way he first learned it. And for better or worse, that's what we have for his legacy. Many choose to complain about Funakoshi teaching schoolboy karate. Fortunately a growing community is following Itosu's 6th lesson and delving into his kata to uncover the great fighting applications hidden just beneath the surface.

I trust that when I post my concepts, that you will judge them on their merits and let me know if I meet your standards for useful applications, as I reveal some concepts (bo against bo, empty hand against bo) that you may not have considered before. I look forward to your feedback.

-Kakushite

Kakushite,

I look forward to your sharing your understanding of the kata technique applications.

I don't hold to the schoolboy karate answer myself. I think it's become a derogatory shorthand to try and encompass events that are much larger and detailed than that phrase implies. But we live in times where people don't care much about the past and are willing to surrender to simple answers than the larger more complex reality.

In my experience it is very difficult to share technique application studies in depth until the student has entered real indepth training. I don't think applications weren't passed on purpose, they weren't passed because the students total abilites were not of a place that they could perform them.

I follow several of my own instructors paradigm for that instruction. Before black belt the student only focuses on a relative handfull of techniques for development of fitting skills. But I do show them a great range of what those applications will do if the student is ready to receive them. Next I share a rather simple application, show it in full detail, really work them on it's path of application and sit back and watch them discover they really can't do simple things I can do with ease (and I'm getting old and slow).

There are many factors involved in this, but I feel the major reason is they don't trust the technique and when faced with the pressure of even modest beginning training attacks, they don't believe in themselves and then do something else. That loses site of the mission, specific skill acquisition.

I'm certain the applications were there in the past, but I wonder how skilled they were at transmitting how to make those applications work, and with the full range of potential in any of the karate sysetms, how to pick and choose, etc., is the larger skills after all.

Good discussion.

for Jitte:what can that beginning slow motion three-hand move do? and after you do the inside cressing kicks and land in a horse stance, what does that twisting of the hands do?

The salutation is an augmented s-lock. The unfolding of arms ends in a finger lock on one of the two pairs of fingers. The separate movements emphasise the motion needed to throw someone after you have locked them out or upset their balance.

For Hungetsu: Why the whole thing in a fudo-dachi stance, it seems like an awkward way to fight? also, what does that turning with the knee high in the air do?

Fudo dachi and sanchin stance are like a boxers stance. It offers stability and lateral evasion. The turning is an arm bar or finger/wrist lock which then gets augmented by the step over and the following knee of the kick. it's been a while so that may not work out.

Lastly, in Heian Gohdan, when you do the high-ex block, and then twist your hands....why? what does that do?

High x-block CAN be used to block attacks...but not like what you see in the movies.

i) Use the "movie block" but very quickly and immediately twist away and roll it into an arresting motion behind their back

ii) Intercept the arm slightly below the elbow on the biceps (in front of the arm) and slightly above the shoulder on the biceps (behind), and roll them down.

I think I may have repeated what others have said...

shame on you victor, you teach for free!

thanks for the info too, i guess we can never know...unless chen zen comes out and admits he founded those kata just to screw up us dumb kata folk, until then nothing i guess.

yours in life

SoL,

Common karate wisdom has it that Jitte/jutte means ten hands (implying strength of 5 men perhaps or ten onehanded men ), Jion means temple sound/bell and Jiin means temple ground but I believe the verifiable meaning is unclear because the characters used nowadays to write the name of the kata are not necessarily the ones used originally. The "monk" connection may be spurious. "Ji" I think means mercy or somthing similar and supposedly there are many temples with names such as Jion in Japan. Maybe it just refers to a distant relationship to Shorin/Shaolin martial arts. I will have to look in the Bubishi to remind myself if any of these are referenced as Chinese forms originally.

There are certainly obvious similarities between the three, including the fist in the hand at the start, mirrored movements start Jion and Jiin, three palm strikes (3 shuto in Jiin/3 tetsui strikes in Jiin and Jion, latter with stamping kick, stamp in Jitte with high almost tetsui movements), manji-ukes and age-ukes in all three but also techniques common to only one kata (double fist techniques end of Jion, possible bo grabbing techniques in Jitte, wedge blocks etc in kiba dachi end of Jiin). All three always felt similar in practice and the embusen are very similar as well. I have read that some people think Jiin and Jion are variations of the same kata or alternatively that these three kata make up a separate system but who knows...

How could we ever really find the origin unless you discovered a Chinese group previously unknown using identical forms? Does it matter (although it may be interesting), if we are still able to find practical applications for the movements?

B.