Why karate first and weapons later?

Hi Harlan,

Why, simplest answer, Because.

On the whole karate did not really include weapons training in any systematic manner until the past 50 or so years.

Seriously till into the 1900's the study of karate was a very private practice and who can say what anyone did or didn't study back then.

As the karate systems of study solidified in the past 100 years normally kobudo wasn't part of the tradition. Kyan Chotoku did incorporate one bo kata (tokomeni no kon).

In Japan one of Funakoshi's students, Taira Shinken, began the study of kobudo through a relationship of Mabuni Kenwa through various instructors and began to collect various Okinawan kobudo traditions, and in turn built many of his own kata. His kobudo tradition was passed on to Innoue (Japan) and Akamine (Okinawa) and with variation remains today.

Taira also shared his kobudo with Okinawan karate instructors in the 50's and 60's (such as Isshinryu's Shimabuku Tatsuo) and taught a piece of his art.

Then you have separate kobudo traditions (Soken's, Yammani's bo traditions, Mataoyshi's Kinga Ryu chinese influenced traditions) that in time became associated also with various karate-ka, but the systems of study remained separate practices.

I think a fair generalization (never totally true) is those in karate traditions that include kobudo incorporated kobudo later in thier arts study.

Then there are karate traditions that do not use kobudo.

Then there are kobudo traditions that are really separate practices than karate.

As you see there is a lot of diversity, and individuals experiences are really shaped by their systems origins.

If you study a kobudo tradition, obviously you'll study that first. In similar light the various Stick systems often begin with stick, and later teach the empty hand uses of their art last.

Isshinryu has diversity in what different schools do to, but most frequently kobudo is a black belt study.

First there is little need for Okinawan kobudo for direct self defense, the weapons are archiac after all. For realistic street self defense, when required, stick study makes more sense logically (of course Smith and Wesson - no relation- have their uses too). On the other hand if it becomes necessary that oar's will be used for getting down the street, then oar study Must come first.

As an Isshiryu stylist, and a lot of other practices too, what I do is utilize kobudo as mostly a black belt study. My students have a lot of empty hand to work on and preparing for black belt I don't see reason to worry about adding weapons study too.

But after black belt, a great deal of time in the following decades will be spent working kobudo, because, when the advanced study of how kata technique is applied, the use of kobudo year after year to build finger/grip/arm and torso strength to make those techniques work better becomes necessary in our practice.

I do not believe one answer is necessarily better than the other, rather if they are consistently used to improve the students, they're fine.

BTW in the Chinese systems such as Shaolin, Eagle Claw, Tai Chi etc, the long term study of weapons is likewise used for building grip strength, etc. The Chinese inventing gun powder, except for bad movies, used guns for serious warfare, not spears, etc. But they contiue those practices as they also have value.

PS - if you check out http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Nishiuchi++&search=Search you'll find hours of material on kobudo derived from Matayoshi Kobudo. Nishiuchi Sensei is not performing exactly the same way your studies will be, but they are parallel studies that might be informative. They will NOT replace your instructor, EVER. Hope they help.

CVV: nice find. I've sent an e-mail to Mr. McCarthy asking him his source.

Victor, I agree with your points. I'm wondering...after WW2, was it common for different arts to share dojo/training space? I've read and heard in person on separate occations now of time-share dojos. It certainly would make sense after war-torn and resource limited to share training space. If that were the case, it's also easy to imagine the sharing of each other's Art.

further hypothesizing - depending on the amount of crossover...could that have meant the difference between seeing kobudo as simply assisting empty hand technique vs. seeing kobudo as an integral part of karate.

admittedly, my first Goju instructor had very little kobudo training...and he saw/taught it as a kind of hojo undo. Whereas Kodokan Goju for instance has much more Kobudo influence, nearly a 50/50 influence of weapons/weaponless systems. ...so it's no surprize the style practitioners see deeper connections between the two?

I've wondered this myself and have come to the conclusion that I do it this way because my sensei did it this way. By that, I mean that the standard answer is pretty meaningless. Your Karate skills are the basis of your Kobudo skills, but your Kobudo skills could as easily be the basis of your Karate skills.

Because there is no good history, let's look at it like this. The first ape-man who wanted to fight better probably picked up a stick or a rock. He did not spend time learning unarmed fighting skills. Having a weapon is better than not having one because he could hit harder at a greater distance. Eventually, sharp rocks were tied to long sticks and even further off, propulsion systems were devised. If Karate really were a martial art in the sense of warfare, weapons would be taught first. However, centralized governments tend to disarm the population in order to have a legal monopoly on violence. Gun control goes back to Henry 8 in England and further back in Japan. So there Karate is, in an occupied country in which weapons are controlled. I would imagine that where one could have a decent weapon, those weapons available were taught. Nobody learned Karate to fight off the Samarai. That would be stupid, but you still have to defend yourself against your neighbors. In Japan, you don't have to learn Jodo before learning Kendo.

Karate then is essentially a civilian art, like Judo. People tend to do what is practical for the situation at hand. Where unarmed, like in cities, they learn unarmed fighting skills. In the country, you learn how to shoot, since you're likely to have a gun on hand. In America, groups like the IDPA and PPSA are creating civilian shooting martial arts drills, almost kata. These classes are popular where carying a pistol is legal.

Where carrying a stick was socially acceptable, people probably learned the local style of bo-jutzu without bothering to learn the unarmed applications, just like British peasants learned the quarterstaff and knife-fighting, the same way people socially allowed to carry swords learned fencing. To determine when it could become practical to teach unarmed fighting before armed fighting, we have to think about when Karate became part of the world outside of Okinawa.

When it was introduced to Japan, Japan already had the sword and the rifle. When it was introduced to Americans, Japan had been defeated by Americans with rifles. I can't imagine the Okinawans thought they were going to get far teaching their huge American Marine students who had just destroyed their island with bombers how to use brass knuckes or tree-branches. Their advantage was at hand to hand unarmed fighting, which is essentially a civilian, not martial, skill. Think of it in terms of marketing. How are you going to convince a US Marine to learn to fight with sticks when he is either armed with a rifle and grenades or unarmed? (What truly surprises me is that the Okinawans never developed a system of knife-fighting.)

Similarly, Shotokan excludes Kobudo completely because the Japanese would not be impressed by Okinawan weapons when they already had their own weapon arts with what are really better weapons. I do Okinawan Kobudo, but given the choice between a yari or nagita and a bo, I know what I would choose.

As to how this applies today, it doesn't. These were choices made under the circumstances of the time. I think teaching bo or surinjin first would force a beginning student to fight with both hands and to chamber when striking. That is hard to teach a beginner. However, five minutes of bo-sparring would teach you to almost never kick. Oak against the shin hurts.

One thing you might notice about Okinawan Kobudo is how Kobudo always offers a non-lethal option. The reverse grip with kama or sai seem designed for submission, not killing. This has little use in a war art. I would say that Karate and Kobudo developed under circumstances similar to our own: where weapons are controlled by a government and killing will have to be answered for.

When you look at the whole pool of information, you can dive in at any point. The starting point is almost arbitrary if you assume the student will keep learning. If the student won't, then why bother? You start with what he is most likely to face. Because of this, I teach the way my instructor taught, because there is no reason to not teach this way.

If I could redesign the martial arts, you would learn pistol shooting first (because anything beyond pistol range is not really self defense), then knife fighting, then unarmed fighting, then Kobudo. In places like Washington DC , NYC, or CA, where you can't carry any weapon at all, I would start with unarmed fighting and move to Kobudo from there for its uses in unarmed fighting and improvised weapons. The stances and basic skills are all the same for every application. You have to start with what is practical for where you are. Practicality is the ultimate tradition.

As for Arnis and Kali, those are arts based in an actual martial struggle dating back to the Spanish occupation, so weapons had to come first. It's a difference of history that became a teaching tradition. They could start from the opposite side too, but there's no reason to change at this point because so many of them are very good at what they do.

Well, there are many different reasons why people prefer to teach empty hand before weapons training. For me, I prefer the empty hand first. I prefer it because in a real situation it would be beneficial to know how to defend yourself without weapons. I know many situations may make it useful to know defense with weapons. But this is only my opinion.
Like I said there are many reasons why you would teach empty hand first.

Simple answer: Karate means empty hand.

That's more than a smart-ass way of saying "just because". Karate evolved w/o the inclusion of improvised weapons. I suspect ancient Ti may have included some archaic Chinese weaponry but that's just guessing. When Te was introduced to the masses, weapons may have been difficult/expensive to procure & the Okinawan school system most surely wouldn't want kids flinging swords & spears around.

Kobudo is a recent term/system. Before that there were loosely formated "curricula" of Bo-jutsu, Sai-jutsu, Nunchaku-jutsu, etc. These improvised weapons were implements of a lower socipo-economic class & were most certainly ignored by ststus-conscious Japanese (I can say that because I'm 1/2 Japanese, so there).

FMA start w/ weapons & progress to empty hand mainly because of the fact the originators carried weapons (knives, short swords & machettes). From field workers to soldiers, the Filipine arcipellego was heavily influenced by the Chinese & Malaysian/Indonesian cultures where sword arts flourished.

The philosophy is that it's easier for someone to defend themselves w/ a weapon right "out of the box" than empty-handed. Although true, remember the other guy may be armed & more highly trained than you resulting in more lethal consequences than an empty handed skirmish.

The introduction of sticks to Kali was a "recent" innovation but a valid substitute for a machette. But keep in mind some words from a Hawaiian friend of mine, "Watch out for Filipinos - they usually carry knives" (OK a stereotype but wise words...& I can say it because I'm married to a Filipina, so there).

Despite my loyalty to Japanese MA, I find Arnis superior to Kobudo which keeps itself behind glass - look but don't touch. By this I mean Kobudo is a demonstration sport - kata only. If Kendo-ka & Arnis practitioners can bang away @ each other, why not Nunchaku, Bo, Tonfa, Eku or wooden Sai/Kama?

(I wrote too much)

Unless I wrote ALL, you can be safe to assume that I didn't mean ALL. I don't know where you get your info but Kobudo training usually comes in the form of Kata or pre-arranged exercizes. It's rare that free-sparring is ever done despite all your broken bones & blood on the floor.

In fact, I only know of one term, "Kumi-bo", to describe an Okinawan weapon fighting. Has any one ever heard of Kumi-nunchaku, Kumi-sai or Kumi-kama?

So just because you & your training partners fight w/ weapons doesn't mean that you're in the majority. Maybe you should visit the Dog Brothers (FMA) in Redondo Beach, California. They don't restrict their "Gathering of the Pack" to Filipino weapons. A few Shinai, Bo & Ninchaku fighters have entered but to the best of my knowledge, none have gone unbeaten.

Owari

Traditionally, in the Chinese systems, weapons were never taught first. The reason, I suspect was that in those days people started MA training as children who obviously needed some foundational body-works to get the strength, balance, stability, co-ordination, discipline first before moving on to the weapons. Since they were children, what was the hurry to teach them the bloody art of slashing, cutting, stabbing? Even in the initial unarmed portion, they were not taught combat application until after learning perhaps 10 empty-hand forms.

The old Chinese masters were obsseesed with building as solid a foundation as possible before moving onto the serious stuff. It was OK in those days because a student was expected to stay with the same master and therefore the same system perhaps for the rest of his MA life.

Now of course like everything else done on a large impersonal/commercial scale, we have a 'pick & mix' attitude, just like in the way we pick and mix our clothing.

From the point of view of training however, I certainly do agree that the unarmed part does prepare a good physical foundation for the weapons part, maybe because I was taught that way, and so could never have seen it any other way. But, if you look at the order in which weapons were taught, it was usually the less harmful (to oneself) stick first and very rarely any of the edged ones. So good body/limb co-ordination, balance and foot-work were essential for proper weapons handling (especially edged ones) So if one already has some period of unarmed forms training, at least the foot-work is already there, especially in the Chinese weapons which involved more jumping around.

Having said that I see no reason why weapons could not be taught first, even to the exclusion of any unarmed technique, especially to adults; just slower perhaps. It just means that the initial training emphasis here will be on the foot-work alone.

I believe the samurai (those that carried two swords) didn't bother much about unarmed stuff; his sacred katana was all he had and needed.

I study a Chinese style and my sifu leads open hand training partially through use of weapons, the theory being that waving a ruddy great six-foot stick around improves strength of arm, stance and grip and teaches you to co-ordinate your hands together. Since a lot of the movements are similar (with different applications) with or without a weapon in your hand, the training reinforces the basic movements regardless.

I think it has an added advantage of breaking down the focus on a weapon when you have one, allowing you to move more fluidly from armed to unarmed techniques.

Adding to the history lesson: Yes, we're all aware that To-de/Kara-te meant China hand long ago but it's been "empty hand" for over a century & that's how we use it. Karate & Kobudo (translated old warring ways) were taught separately until Mabuni popularized the combined instruction. So what were the systems called before "Kobudo" became the umbrella term? I don't know.

Quote - "The reason you don't hear those terms is because most fighters don't bring up a sai against another sai, or kama against another kama. Most of the time it's kama, sai, nunchaku, tonfa, tinbe against a bo." Why?

I believe that the "short weapons" (nunchaku, kama, tonfa & sai - actually an ancient Chinese import) were utilized against the bo because, contrary to popular thought, not all samurai carried swords. Most were spear carriers. Only the higher class samurai (bushi) were allowed to carry swords. This can be seen again & again in historic paintings of the wars & skirmishes as well as historical texts. But kobudo also has techniques against swords - sai. Nunchaku vs. dai-to = cabbage vs. vege-matic.

can you imagine 'kama kumite' ? yikes.

kama student 1: "hey, were you wearing a pink topknot?"

kama student 2: "No, why?"

student 1: {points to floor} "oh, then that must be your thumb I lopped off."

student 2: "I hope it was my thumb..."

I see a SNL sketch there...

In the FMA's, you learn weapons first then empty hands later, the total opposite of karate. To me this seems fantastic because a weapon is just an extension of your body anyways, so why not learn how to use it inconjuction with your limbs, then later apply the techniques in the exact same way w/o the weapon. The stick, knives, sword are all used in the same way really. Learning one weapon in the FMA's helps you learn all the weapons including empty hand fighting.

Karate itself technically means "empty hands". Since the purpose of karate is self defense, weapons are useless anyhow. Who's going to carry around a pair of nunchuka around town to defend themselves anyway? First of all, its illegal; secondly, its too deadly.

The purpose I train with weapons is to strengthen my empty handed karate. If a student is having trouble keeping their fists closed the entire time that they hit bags, spar, or do tonfas, it helps to give them a pair of tonfas to do the same kata with (entirely empty handed), so they get the feel of HAVING to keep their fists closed.

This is just my opinion; anyone else?

Slightly off subject but I dont think its good to always have the fist clenched.

Pickaxe! My favorite weapon. Ever do Quwa kata with it?

Question...why sawed off handle?

Eh pat hows life? You know Shihan Bill Brassette from the western slope Seibukan? Yeah hes my teacher. I'm a student instructor Sensei for the kids classes. You see him tell him Taylor says hey. Nice common sense btw.

Yes Curly I know Bill of “Seibu-kan” not Seibukan. Haven’t seen him for years though. I would have sent you a PM but there is no e-mail listed in your bio. So I'll just ask here, out of curiosity what organization does the Grand Junction group belong to and who’s signatures show up on you certificates is it Zenpo Shimabukuro or Dan Smith?

Organization: I'll check... I knew what it was... Cant remember what organization exactly it was.

And that'd be Zenpo's signature as well. Haven't heard much about Dan Smith.

Let me get the info.

Curly

As before I'd prefer to pm you however. Long story short, Bill and I are not friends and I was attempting to find out who he claimed affiliation with these days. And I will pretty much guarantee you he will go ballistic if you ask him. I just hoped you might know off the top of your head. I apologize for putting you at risk.

Thanks for warning me now -.-; Did you mean if I asked about the organization or about you?

Haven't asked yet; I'm not afraid to but I'll just check the certificates on the wall. I think something like the "Shobu-rei-shobu-kan" organization sticks out in my mind; but don't quote me on that. I'll just check monday before the kids classes start to find out indefinately.

I still find him to be a respectable and credible martial-artist; though you may have known him for longer than I have. I'm currently in Cheyenne, WY for St. Paddies day with my family and drive through Denver tomorrow to get back to Junction. Maybe I should drop by for a class or two .

Probably won't have time to though. Left my belt and gi in Junction anyway. I'll just talk to you on here. Or through pm.

'Ave a good one.

Heres a nice link and pic of Zenpo and Shihan Bill with the certificate/organization.
Hope that answers any other questions. Go here for the pic Pat:

Zenpo and Shihan- http://www.seibu-kan.com/pic1.html

On one level as well, Japanese Kenjutsu can very well teach the sword at the same time as or before empty-hand technique.

Different schools&Sensei too, of course. Further, from what i understand most Karate Weaponry's techniques were based off of empty-hand movements/concepts. Sort of like the inverse of how some Aikijujutsu concepts/techniques came from using the Daito.

bump

bump for the newbies...

anything to add?

Harlan:

Why would I want to give a looney, psycho unbalanced nutjob training with a weapon before I knew far, far more about them? I want sane balanced, mature grown-ups learning weapons please.

Safety issue...

Jeff

Jeff,

Perhaps you should start with mature grown ups.

Well...it's not like we are talking about guns, or even swords here. It's just a stick to begin with.