Karate Ground Fighting - Historical Proof

Victor,

Are the books you mentioned available in english (with grappling illustrations intact)? If so from where?

Is it possible for you to some how show us some of these grappling illustrations?

I agree with Ed in that most of what has been discussed through the various recent grappling debates has been quite specific (or at least I've tried to keep it that way) ground grappling skills a la UFC/BJJ etc: two people on the floor struggling with each other to get chokes or arm bars rather than trying to get back to their feet. It's only very late in the discussion that karate wrestling camp changed their tune about this and as far as I can tell standing grappling inclusive of take downs and restraints were generally accepted to have been an integral aspect of Karate, one which has been recorded in the kata.

If those books you mentioned show the kind of sustained ground grappling I mentioned above then I will happily accept that I was wrong, but a few throws and ground restraints are very different to what was initially being debated.

Ed,

The Historical Proof, scant as it is, is not a question of interpretation.

Funakoshi clearly shows defense resonse while fighting from the ground, as well as standing throws. I believe this covers two of your categories.

Mutsu illustrates both of them as well as ground grappling.

There books were meant to be offerings to the Japanese martial establishments as well as their students.

The arts that developed in Japan fit their own definitions as to where an art should go, likely not focusing on grappling because those traditions were alreayd there (ie school Judo training) and most of their students had already practiced (and some continuing) those other arts.

Of course when they wrote those books that was 'today' and what they did at that time (in small part).

There is no general description of 'karate' that is remotely accurate, for each generazliation there are a world of contradictions, even if you haven't personally experienced them.

I only offer this because the written record does contain a historical truth that should be considered.

Perhaps the development of karate in Japan wasn't overly concerned with the grappling arts because they were a modertly civilized society and those practicing grappling were not attacking karate-ka so there was little perceived need. Temper that of course with reality, they were also turning their aggressions in the 20's onward to other places. Tromping Korea, Manchuria, WWII, etc.

Sho,

Mutsu's book is currently only avaiable in Japan as a reprint and it costs a ton of money. Joe Swift is working towards completing a translation and publishing it in English but there is not a deadling when this will be available.

Funakoshi's original 'Karate Do Koyan' was recently published for a large amount of money. The photo's are also in Patrick McCarthy's 'Tappanshu' (spelling not sure at the moment) for a modest sum. The photo's aren't the best copies but you can clearly see what he is showing.

Patrick's book also contains a translation of the Bubishi texts from Funakoshi's book, and it is clear in that it focuses on Grappling and Escapes. As Funakoshi always had it in his books (but in Chinese) you can make your own conclusions if his finger was pointing to a way the JKA didn't follow?

Of course a book with illustrations and photo's for a few techniques does NOT show how they trained or how they worked those drills. It is clear that the JKA didn't continue those practices and eventually dropped them from subsequent republication of the 'Karate Do Koyan'.

It is also clear members of the JKA had Mutsu's book. They may not have focused on his applications, but his 1933 work contained most of the kata the JKA would adopt, in addition to the 15 Funakoshi published.

There is less documented from an Okinawan point of view, but my seniors in Isshinryu in the late 50's studied counters for the mount.

The evidence simply suggests that we have nothing more detailed to address the issue, but at least it was not originally ignored in Karate.

I know none of you, but in my experience most people don't need cross training, but stronger training in their own arts. In my early years I did seek others to train with, not to learn of their arts (which did happen in part) but just to train. I have experienced the good, the bad and even the ugly (but I'm too adult to dwell on that). The end result I focused on my own art and then ran into a senior who did the same for 40 years and helped focus my own arts potential.

There is only so much history available, and most of that oral tradition. You can look, but the largest key is to focus on today and your training.

Some how I think of Motobu, street fighting experience and all. His writings suggest be wary of any attack, but he spent decades striking his makiwara with a single knuckle punch. Some how, up or down, I'm sure his strike would inflict so much pain he wouldnt' be down long.

Just an opinion, but it always seems longer, better, harder traiing is the real key in any art.

Hi Butterfly,

"Don't expect any one with less than 20 years of serious training to understand that at a physical level."

Agreed, which is why I think focusing on your own training is most important.

There is a mixing of 2 separate topics into one:

Victor, is this thread intended to be:

A. a discussion of historical evidence on the topic.
or
B. a discussion of personal experience on the topic.

either of which, I don't ever remember reading anyone stating that Karate cannot contain groundfighting.

In fact, I think more compelling than the links you give in this thread, is your post from some time ago a very clear picture of karateka (who cross-trained in judo) during the 1930's on Hawaii ground-grappling.

if this thread was meant as a carry-over topic from the others, I think the issue was different:
"historical evidence of groundfighting trained thru kata study"


just trying to maintain clear communication on these boards is very difficult and almost not worth the effort of trying to clarify on every single post, since people tend to scan and not read. but if the arguments aren't clear, then how would the discussions go?

just clearing my thoughts...

Hi Ed,

First the thread is to discuss historial proof of Karate ground technique. BTW none of the sources show those techniques as kata derived, per sea.

But as you note it's difficult to separate discussion from personal experience, as important a record as the written one, just difficult for those outside of your event horizon to understand.

fair and true enough... (what fun would it be if no one stired the pot every now and then )

I still don't see any proof of what we have been arguing.

there is none...thats the point

ok, talking straight the truth is there is evidence that past karateka blended whichever influences they had, lumped it into their Art - sometimes into a cohesive system, sometimes adhoc. but since they lived a long time ago, we revere their efforts and out of respect, we assume they knew what they were doing.

having said that, even though we respect their efforts, each sucessive generation is going to do whatever they want.

and thats been the historical truth: things have always changed.

Seiken,

The true value of long term training came from various incredible instructors in different styles who shared part of their arts with me. I came to learn the important lesson are the underlying principles, and then when I worked to develop skills in my students, long term skills I began to learn more.

Any of those instructors would have gotten me to that point if I could have trained with them for the decades. But life doens't work that way often. Instead I have the example of trying to understand their ablities.

So my way is a comination of 35 years in Isshinryu, 30 years in Yang Tai Chi Chaun and a lot of other important stuff.

It was never about fighting, it was about the study and in time what that became.

Ed,

Unfortuantely I read and re-read the old texts finding new lessons.

IMO, the real goal of karate is to build the confidence and skill of a Motobu Chokoi. In the Patrick % Yuriko translation "Motou CHoki Karate My Life" there are the collected sayings of Motobu Choki by Nakata Mizuhiko (translated in 2001 by Joe Swift).No 23. "I will fight anyone, be they karate practitioners, judo practioners, sumo wrestlers, boxers, etc. However, I do guarantee that they will not die during the bout."

sorry, the relavance escapes me. that Motobu was willing to fight anyone means what?