Empty hand flows from weapons...

[Makalakumu]

I recently had some time to meet and talk karate with Sensei Peter Carbone, 9th dan in Okinawan Kobudo/Kempo. One of the things that he said that really intrigued me was that all "traditional karate" started with weapons. The empty hand techniques are supposed to flow from the weapon techniques. When I asked him why so many Okinawan derivitive systems reverse that, his response was something I will never forget...

"Why train your least effective weapons the most?"

This suddenly made alot of sense. I have trained in some traditional aikijutsu and fairly extensively in arnis de mano and that is how these system's start. The fundamentals of the weapons start first and the movement and footwork involved flows right into the empty hand.

With karate, this is still a total mystery to me and I'm just wondering what other people think about this...

 

[Empty Hands]

I don't know, I could see arguments for either way. For the empty hand side, you could argue that any house should be built from the foundation up. Learn your stances and footwork, body control, and then limb control before you go on to put extensions on those limbs.

 

[cstanley]

I think he is speculating.

 

[Makalakumu]

I don't know if that is all speculation. Carbone Sensei is soley responsible for bringing people like Oyata Sensei to the US. His weapons are considered by the Okinawan masters to be the best in the world. From the tiny little that I saw of what he was doing, I could see direct application in many of the kata that I practice.

Hiki-te takes on a whole new meaning when weapons are involved...

 

[Errant108]

I think he is speculating.

Who? Sensei Carbone? What makes you say that?

 

[Sukerkin]

I can tell you from my own experience that I have advanced the same theorem and gotten an affirmative response from my sensei (6th dan Karate, 5th dan MJER, sundry other lower dans).

The salient point to consider is that the empty-handed arts were developed for warriors who had lost their weapons or as an adjunct to their weapons (leaving aside largely mythological tales of Okinawan wonder-peasants taking down arrogant Samurai). Why learn an entirely new pattern of movements for such circumstances when you could more easily adapt motions used with weapons?

I've seen sensei use this similarity to teach swordwork to karateka's - "It's like {insert karate technique} but with {insert this difference because you have a sword in your hands}".

 

[Makalakumu]

The above is a good post.

Okinawan Bushi were not peasents fighting in rice paddies with Naihanchi kata. They were warriors in charge of protecting the king. What kind of weapons are men like these going to train the most?

The answer is simple.

The most effective weapons available.

Now, the hard part is trying to figure out how this progression flows. How does this curriculum work?

 

[Makalakumu]

Who? Sensei Carbone? What makes you say that?

A simple googling of his name would provide ample evidence for the skeptical mind. Actually visiting the man and seeing the 3,300 hundred square foot dojo being built in his back yard would be another bit.

To realize that masters of Okinawan Karate come to visit Carbone Sensei, in the middle winter, in Detroit(!), is another thing entirely.

 

[Rich Parsons]

I recently had some time to meet and talk karate with Sensei Peter Carbone, 9th dan in Okinawan Kobudo/Kempo. One of the things that he said that really intrigued me was that all "traditional karate" started with weapons. The empty hand techniques are supposed to flow from the weapon techniques. When I asked him why so many Okinawan derivitive systems reverse that, his response was something I will never forget...

"Why train your least effective weapons the most?"

This suddenly made alot of sense. I have trained in some traditional aikijutsu and fairly extensively in arnis de mano and that is how these system's start. The fundamentals of the weapons start first and the movement and footwork involved flows right into the empty hand.

With karate, this is still a total mystery to me and I'm just wondering what other people think about this...

Me and Peter do not agree on much.

He trained in Modern Arnis, which could be where he got the idea of weapons training for empty hands.

But then again it could be something else, such as the BS he preached about how his art was the oldest in the world and all other arts spawned from it.

I know some who trained with him in Karate, for that I cannot truly speak, but my interactions with him for Modern Arnis with relationship to GM Remy Presas, he was rude/disrespectful and so were some of his senior students.

 

[exile]

Believe me, I don't have a horse in this race. But I find the following interesting:

During the 11th century, a number of Japanese warriors fleeing from the Taira-Minamoto wars made their way to Okinawa. Many of the Minamoto samurai took Okinawan wives and remained upon the island for the rest of their days. The bujitsu of the Minamoto samurai had a large influence on the fighting methods employed by the Okinawan nobles. One part of Minamoto bujitsu that had an influence on the development of karate was the idea that all motion is essentially the same. Whether striking, grappling or wielding a weapon, the Minamoto samurai taught that all combative methods relied on similar physical movements. An individual would be taught a particular physical movement and would then be shown how that movement could be adapted to achieve varying goals.​

(Abernethy, Bunkai-Jutsu, pp.16–17). If Abernethy is right here—and I've noticed that his historical analyses are usually founded on well-established and reputable sources—the original point seems to get some support from what he has to say about the combat world-view of very early Okinawan MAists, particularly in view of the fact that for the samurai, the default combat situation would involve a weapon...

 

[MBuzzy]

This makes a lot of sense to me. In fact, talking to Senseir Carbone brought about a huge realization in my mind. I had always wondered why we drill so hard on wrist grabs and wrist joint locks. It really doesn't seem that common of a way to grab someone to me. Seems like you are putting yourself in a vulnerable position and if you are attacker with real malicious intent, you will either be using a weapon or grabbing from behind - some type of more immobilizing grab.

But when you look at historical principles, if someone wants to stop a Samurai from attacking with his most effective weapon - the sword, the best bet is to stop it from getting out of the scabbard. Now, I can see grabbing someone in the wrist as they are trying to draw a sword. The wrist grabs would be very effective if you need to release a grip on your arms so that you can draw. Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but it makes sense to me!

Also, in a wartime situation, EVERYONE will have a weapon of some kind. Why teach someone to fight empty handed when weapons are abundant? Even in the military, we teach weapons skills first, then empty handed combative skills. Because no one is going to battle without their weapon. I can't think that militaries of hundreds of years ago were much different.

 

[MBuzzy]

One other point....Since I've started training in sword arts, I have seen a huge impact on my empty handed arts. Proof enough for me. They are most definately linked.

 

[Steel Tiger]

Believe me, I don't have a horse in this race. But I find the following interesting:

During the 11th century, a number of Japanese warriors fleeing from the Taira-Minamoto wars made their way to Okinawa. Many of the Minamoto samurai took Okinawan wives and remained upon the island for the rest of their days. The bujitsu of the Minamoto samurai had a large influence on the fighting methods employed by the Okinawan nobles. One part of Minamoto bujitsu that had an influence on the development of karate was the idea that all motion is essentially the same. Whether striking, grappling or wielding a weapon, the Minamoto samurai taught that all combative methods relied on similar physical movements. An individual would be taught a particular physical movement and would then be shown how that movement could be adapted to achieve varying goals.​

(Abernethy, Bunkai-Jutsu, pp.16–17). If Abernethy is right here—and I've noticed that his historical analyses are usually founded on well-established and reputable sources—the original point seems to get some support from what he has to say about the combat world-view of very early Okinawan MAists, particularly in view of the fact that for the samurai, the default combat situation would involve a weapon...

This is a very interesting point. Mainly because the primary method of combat during the Heian period, for samurai, was with the bow. The fighting method called Yoroi-jutsu was apparently a grappling method but it seems to have been focused on getting into a position to stick the enemy with a tanto. It also appears to have been favoured over swordplay. The sword was coming into its own though, as attested by descriptions of Minamoto no Yoshitsune is action. It is obvious that, even though the bow was favoured, Heian samurai gave thought to all aspects of combat.

MBuzzy makes a good point about wrist grabs in particular and limb grabs in general. If they progressed from concepts coming from Yoroi-jutsu, then you can see how valuable they would have been in keeping an opponent from getting that tanto out.

Of course, it has to be remembered that Okinawan arts had already appeared before the Minamoto refugees arrived, so it might be a blending of concept and philosophy with extant cambat method. I don't know, I'm speculating based on what little I know of Okinawan and Japanese arts. My own art is so far removed from this conversation as to be useless as a guide.

 

[chinto]

kobujitsu and kobudo are older then Karate on Okinawa. so yes empty hand was based on some of the weapons techniques. that is not to say that empty hand techniques were not around before karate, some were. but that after the compleat weapons ban on Okinawa unarmed combat became more stressed as to have a weapon on you was a ticket to summarily be executed. as time passed the tools and implements were weaponized as far as the ability to use them effectively and efficiently against an armed man with say a katana or other weapon such as a Yari or what have you.

 

[TimoS]

Koryu jujutsu styles were heavily influenced by the weapons work and when I was still training in jujutsu, our instructor said that you cannot understand jujutsu without a sword. As for Ryukyu armed and unarmed methods, I'm not so sure about the 1:1 linkage, at least not anymore. In my previous karate style our instructor had developed his own kobudo by borrowing heavily from existing Ryukyu kobudo, japanese kobudo and also escrima. His idea was the same: what you do with weapons can be also done with empty hands and vice versa. Nowadays I'm not so sure anymore. Sure, some of the moves in karate kata can be transformed into weapons work (see e.g. here

He's doing Shorin(ji) ryu kata Ananku, the actual video title was someone's idea of a joke), but when you add a weapon such as bo into your empty hand kata, you won't be able to do the kata bunkai anymore, because e.g. the distance changes and the whole idea of kata (at least to me) is in the applications. If you only do the forms without any applications (such as many modern karate styles do), then it doesn't really matter if you can't do the kata applications anymore.

 

[Makalakumu]

Me and Peter do not agree on much.

He trained in Modern Arnis, which could be where he got the idea of weapons training for empty hands.

But then again it could be something else, such as the BS he preached about how his art was the oldest in the world and all other arts spawned from it.

I know some who trained with him in Karate, for that I cannot truly speak, but my interactions with him for Modern Arnis with relationship to GM Remy Presas, he was rude/disrespectful and so were some of his senior students.

The way he explained it to me was that Okinawa was a cultural center, a great cultural melting pot, where all sorts of martial arts mixed and mashed to create Te. That certainly seems plausible given what I know of Okinawan history.

As far as his relationship with Remy Presas, Carbone Sensei mentioned that too, saying that they were pretty close friends. Interesting perspective, Rich.

 

[cstanley]

1. There is a long history of purely empty hand arts in China and on Okinawa that developed independently of any weapons.

2. The fact that kobudo and karate have some similar moves and dynamics does not mean that either developed from the other.

3. There are weapons ryu that do not use karate type stances and the dynamics of which are unique (Yamani ryu).

4. Some of you sound like you are trying to learn to do sword using karate stances and dynamics. That is incorrect and misleading. Kenjutsu and karate have almost NOTHING to do with each other. Find a real sword school.

5. Not all karateka were body guards for the Shogun. Clayton is wrong.

6. Carbone and others like him are looking for an edge, a marketing gimmick, some unique or new idea. It isn't as simple as any of them want to make it.

7. Just because someone makes good weapons and has a huge dojo doesn't mean they are correct in their speculations.

8. Anyone can get Okinawans and Japanese to come to their dojo. Contact them, pay their airfare, hotel, and a fee and feed them. Then you can have all the photo ops you like.

9. My suspicion here is that, in some cases, this whole theory is an effort by some to find an excuse for doing karate kata with weapons or vice versa and for simplifying things to suit them. Kobudo and karate are very different arts. Just because a typist and a concert pianist sit alike and use the same motions does not mean that Mary Lou Headlights out in the office will be playing Mozart concertos at home tonight.

 

[harlan]

An aside from a newbie: I think that if one's 'empty hand' is modeled, or forced to fit, one's kobudo...that it will suffer. And vice versa. I train Matayoshi kobudo, and Goju ryu at the same time (started with weapons training first...which is okay in our system)...and while there are many similarities...I'm of the mind that the statement 'the weapon is an extension of the hand' has been used to justify some bad mechanics.

 

[TimoS]

2. The fact that kobudo and karate have some similar moves and dynamics does not mean that either developed from the other.

True, because after all, there aren't that many ways to available to use your body, so there are bound to be similarities. The similarities, however, don't (necessarily) mean a connection

5. Not all karateka were body guards for the Shogun. Clayton is wrong.

I would imagine that (almost) none were bodyguards for shogun. King of Okinawa is a different story altogether Not many were his bodyguards either, for that matter.

 

[cstanley]

I would imagine that (almost) none were bodyguards for shogun. King of Okinawa is a different story altogether Not many were his bodyguards either, for that matter.

My mistake. Thanks for the correction.