Sinbad

No problem

Gotta head home--"talk" to folks later.

One -

Thanks for the breakdown. So, I'm gathering that this theory, while provocative and interesting, does not seem to be based on any type of historical fact or research. I don't have a problem with Mr Johnson saying "I think kata is based on weapons" as a theory or idea. But to for him to stress that his is the true or correct way ("decoded") is flawed at best, when it is generally agreed that there is NO one standard way of interpreting kata.

His lack of historical basis makes it even less academic.

in the meantime, while you gather your thoughts for thursday...I took the liberty of asking a similar question on another forum:
http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?p=427153#post427153

then connect that info with here:
http://www.e-budokai.com/articles/weapons.htm
(jutte section)

and here, from CFA issue #7: Chinese Police & Chinese Martial Arts.
This article by Brian Kennedy and Elizabeth Guo, point out that in Qing Dynasty (1644-1911) China, there were no police, but rather "Jian-min" ('low class ruffians, mean people') which acted as court-runners who's primary duty was tax collection, summons, arrests and carrying out judicial torture....and of course, bribes. They were more like disorganized mobsters doing chores for the local services 'under the table', than law enforcement.
They further mention that when China DID start to create an organized police force at the turn of the 20th century, they modeled it after Japan...and even hired Japanese law enforcement to train and help organize it's new force. The Japanese, remember, revamped IT'S force based upon European models during the start of their Meiji period just a few decades prior. Then when China went republic in 1912, it incorporated it's own Martial Arts training including rope arrests, Chin-na, etc.
It's likely that even if China did use restraining devices looking like sai and having formalized training such as forms...it would have been after 1912. There was simply no infastracture to support a systematic police force. It didn't exist.

we know that okinawan kata existed well before China had an organized and trained police force in 1912. The earliest substantiated viewing of Okinawan kata was written about from the 1850's. When Higaonna returned from China, it is documented that he didn't teach ANY weapons. This was substantiated by several independant sources...namely, Higaonna's senior students. If he brought back sai/weapons kata from China, where were the sais in his teachings? If the sai kata were for restraining and arresting...where is the evidence that China even had law enforcement during that time?

so it appears we might have one part of the recipie for the new Myth:

Take samurai-era law-enforcement history and superimpose it onto China using a weapon which likely came AFTER the Jutte.

sometimes you really have to wonder how people can justify writing a book and having the audacity to use words like 'evidence', 'fact', 'truth' and 'theory'.

Saying Okinawan kata is based on Chinese law enforcement devices is not even a theory...it's like an ad-hoc posting on an internet forum trying out a guess.

Hi Jim,

Thanks for your kind offer. If you contact me off line we can discuss the possibility.

I would like to clarify my view on these issues. While I've tried my best to see what is available from the past, I don't spend any time worrying about what the original answers were.

From my perspective my only goal is to take any technique I practice and drop any attack with it. I don't worry about what the original meaning is or was. Makes little difference. I see a movement in a very different perspective. If I can take the opening section of Isshinryu's Seisan kata and make it work 50 or 100 different ways, I don't care what the original intent was a bit, and if what I'm doing isn't classical, that's fine.

Heck I just spent some time last weekend with an instructor who just focused on one aspect of opening techniques.

But it's a careful, long study in itself, I work at.

I think too much effort is focused on trying to discern origins and not enough effort on making what you do work, which is vastly more important, IMO.

The only real lesson I've garnered from the past, is to track how change occurs (only from the Okinawan perspective) and try to understand why it did. Those forces are the most powerful ones, understanding what shaped change in the past and how it will shape change in the future.

Simply break karate into a few periods:
Classical - say pre 1900
Traditional - say 1900 to 1950
Modern - say 1950 to now
Contemporary - the past 10 years

For all of that time there is no proof of anything.

For the Classical period, because karate's traditions were a non-literate form of transmission and vastly non-verbal too (without an extensive technical vocabulary) there is no proof of anything, except that of oral history.

Anyone making any claims (whether the possible Chinese origins of techniques, what was really studied, how training was conducted, etc. is just making assumptions, there is no proof.

During the Traditional period, in Japan alone, the Okinawan's and then the Japanesee began to capture the arts by producing books, movies, etc. The thing is all of those medium are incapable of capturing the truth of decades of study. They might be snapshots but without the connecting dots. Suppose you find a really old movie with the karate-ka showing incredible technique, what's there doesn't explain how to get there, the layers of training. Just glimpses, valuable, but just that and little more, and most of the real history was never captured, EVER!

Then the modern era. Okinawan reluctantly began to share some of their arts in books and video. But everywhere the same remains, only the outer shell can be shown.

Finally the contemporary period. Now everything is becoming available. Books in Japanese are slowly being translated into English and other languages. Very, very little that has ever been filmed is not available on line at a fingers touch today.

And you still don't really know what happened.

Put this into some context, please, but the important lessons take place in the dojo, not here, where we can just chew the fat.

pleasantly,

Quote:

---

I think too much effort is focused on trying to discern origins and not enough effort on making what you do work, which is vastly more important, IMO.

---

I disagree on a couple of points: 1) To find out relevant truths as they relate to your practice seems to me always a worthy goal; and 2) To be dismissive about finding actual, documented applications from a historical backdrop seems problematic.

No 1 is what it is and is just my opinion. For, No. 2 however, I could train at flicking toothpicks for years on end and become quite good at it if I considered a snapping motion with my fingers in a particualr kata could sponsor such defensive use (poking someone's eye out with a toothpick); or, I could use a 2x4 to bat a baseball and try to make it awkwardly function for my requirement of hitting a ball. However, this begs the question of efficiency and not reverse engineering something to work, sort-of, as I would like it to.

Instead of toothpick flicking I would get a pistol---and instead of a 2x4, I would get a baseball bat. This, in my mind, brings up Ockham's Razor and if you have to think overlong and convolute the process to find a reasonable answer to application, then it probably ain't so and there are easier solutions to be had.

-B

One

Please get your attibution stright, "I" NEVER questioned how much you were "makeing" off this discussion.

You still have failed to answer my direct responses/questions.

My bet is "can't"---but "won't" works as well

Here is ANOTHER question, since Okinawan karate ALREADY had and has an extent ciruculem with various weapons--including the sai, why bother to have "Sanchin Sai" kata at all??

All that would be ia ADDING to the number of perfectly good, dedicated sai kata.

Whats the point of that???

Again, a serious oversight in the "theory" in that any "explination" as to why anyone would just ignore an entire body of sai kata and drills and practice and info in favor of of a titular "secret" swap the empty hand for sai" theory is MORE complex, convoluted and twisted, than the situation its trying to solve---thus its probably jacked up wrong.

That pesky Occams razor again

Glad your giving up "proofs" as you have none.

Thus, since YOUR the guy that made the claim--which you now say you have no "proof" of.

You lose--and your claims can be judged as worthless since YOU can't back them up

Quote by Victor Smith -

Quote:

---

From my perspective my only goal is to take any technique I practice and drop any attack with it. I don't worry about what the original meaning is or was. Makes little difference. I see a movement in a very different perspective. If I can take the opening section of Isshinryu's Seisan kata and make it work 50 or 100 different ways, I don't care what the original intent was a bit, and if what I'm doing isn't classical, that's fine.

---

I don't think anyone here is arguing against multiple interpretations of kata. The problem in this case seems to be one of claiming the "best" or "original" application with flimsy supporting evidence. As Butterfly implied, it seems to lead to application ideas on the "not so much" side of practicality.

Butterfly,

It isn’t that I disagree with using relevant historical information if discovered, it’s just that I don’t expect it to be found, and god bless anyone who can. When you have a tradition based on keeping everything private, and documenting almost none of it, there is little to turn to but oral history and that is fraught with difficulties. If it can be found and used more the good, but I’m not holding my breath. I have friends actively engaged in translating what was written and perhaps they will find some valuable material, but even then it takes more than just reading something to integrate it into your program of study.

As for long term kata research, if you can take a technique, look at its potential and drop someone what else is there even if others haven’t taken the time to explore those options. And BTW, they are simple answers that work, just in my experience few have taken those paths.

Reverse engineering is a false concept in my book. There is just technique and its applications. I don’t teach developing students those studies, but they may change what my developing students are exposed to.

What I see in my own studies the application potential of kata technique fit two answers. Those that work extremely well when you train up to them, and are prime ways to drop someone. The other applications are ones you would not choose to use because simpler answers are available, BUT, they are extremely valuable in skill building, learning how to fit into various situations with greater skill, even if they are not optimal answers.

It really depends on whether one believes in skilled techniques or only believes simple answers are the way.

I’ve worked with many highly skilled people in many arts, and I believe you can choose to follow those paths and not sacrifice anything. They didn’t get those skills debating, just using their studies and hard training.

Victor

My own little "pipe dream" is that someone, maybe working on a new house or laying a pipeline will come across the books/papers/research Miyagi claimed he buried to keep it safe during the war.

As goes the story he sealed it up pretty good--just barely possible that its still extent.

Not holding my breath either of course