The Weapon is an Extension of your Body

Bobbe

White Belt
Joined
Jun 27, 2006
Messages
19
Reaction score
7
Location
Seattle
I was going over this popular idea prevalent in many martial systems: “Think of the weapon as an extension of your body”. I have a healthy respect for empty hand Martial Arts, plenty enough not to scoff at them when I see something alien to my training. But there is an inherent flaw in the design of many empty hand arts, one that has been cultivated to present, as Microsoft would say, “A feature, not a bug”.

I understand the "sticky" element in trapping and the structural needs in a classical, empty handed art. By that I mean, the reason stances, hip twisting, forward lunging and other things are set up in a way to deliver a single shot with maximum power. So there is a need for proper body structure, stancework and the like in empty hand arts. And yes, you should look at a weapon as an extension of your body…

HOWEVER


Classical blocks and stances in arts that aren't weapon-based don't consider the weapon in forms and drills. A good example of this is Wing Chun, you don't bend at the waist, bob or weave, and the blocks & parries are designed to "stick" to an opponent's arm. Furthermore, the blocks allow punches to get within a certain distance that, given the idea of a few extra inches of steel at the end of the fist, are dangerous. Add the element of the body structure, and the result will likely kill you.

This point is so often ignored, it’s usually forgotten about during “weapons” training in empty hand arts. But you must understand: Weapons use conforms to a different set of rules, and you can’t simply drag your weapon of choice through whatever empty hand regime you know and get the same results. Different systems approach weapons training with different things in mind, and I don’t want to make a sweeping generalization here, but I rarely see another practitioner or teacher from the harder styles like Karate or Kung Fu say something like “Let’s step away from Goju Ryu for a moment and see how people who have a casual familiarity with violence and blade work train it.”

Not to offend, but those I am particularly speaking of with such familiarity are the ones trained in Southeast Asian Martial Arts, often (annoyingly) referred to as “the Eclectic Arts”. (Like we’re somehow less legit because the Indonesians didn’t have Samurai, or the Filipinos don’t use Black Belts. Well, they do now, but I still remember the days…)

There are key stress points a “classically” trained martial artist presents that, to them, appear as strong defenses. And that’s not untrue, as long as we are speaking of UNARMED combat. However, a good knife fighter looks for these things. See, unlike the hands and arms, you CANNOT allow the knife to get close to your body, or play along your forearm as if it were a punch. Many classical systems give this rule up by default, using a classical block to deal with a knife. As an example, I tried to teach some basic Filipino knifework to one of my Wing Chun instructors about 8 years ago. He kept using Bong Sau (wing deflection block) to try to enter unarmed on a knife. It was a LONG time, with a lot of repeated drills to get him to actually HIT the attacking weapon arm & not block it or try to "stick" to it. Also, you cannot bring your torso/lower abdomen into the fight along with your attacking hands/weapon, because if you miss the parry or get faked out somehow, then you've just offered a good target to your opponent that didn't have a need to be there.

This is where many practitioners of classical martial arts tend to lose sight of the difference between a STYLE and a METHOD. Most styles have rules that cannot be bent for any reason, whereas a method simply says "here's the general idea...Make it work for you". Most bladed weapons don't need the "classical" body structure and alignment to kill, particularly knives. All you need is some sort of delivery system to get the blade into the target, that's it. You don't need to generate power like you would with a punch or palm strike, a sharp weapon doesn't need such. All a knife has to do is get close, the only power it needs is running along the edge. Keeping this at the forefront of your training can open up a different world for you in terms of understanding the nebulous nature of knife fighting, and when playing by the rulebook of a system vs. object practicality should be viewed with a critical eye. Again, a style will argue that you must adhere to the playbook. A method will say “I’m flexible, try out some different options with this. Let me know how it goes”.

I think that Filipino or Indonesian weapon training can help anyone in other arts as an individual grow and evolve with realization in your art. However, I recommend you keep them separate for several years, and don't try to blend them until you have a good understanding of BOTH under your belt. Otherwise, the search for "cohesive technique" will impede the learning process, and you'll constantly be looking for "Technique" instead of "Principle" which is way more important in my opinion. Don’t get hung up on stylistic differences, or loyalty issues to your school or dojo. You can train a different art for no other reason than to better understand your own.

No offense meant toward anyone, hope this post was informative.
 

tellner

Senior Master
Joined
Nov 18, 2005
Messages
4,379
Reaction score
240
Location
Orygun
Congratulations, Bobbe!

Your first substantive post here will tick off two thirds of the empty-hand stylists.

"And that's," as Martha Stewart says "a Good Thing."
 

Brian R. VanCise

MT Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Sep 9, 2004
Messages
27,758
Reaction score
1,520
Location
Las Vegas, Nevada
As always it is a pleasure to read your posts!
icon6.gif
 

arnisador

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 28, 2001
Messages
44,573
Reaction score
456
Location
Terre Haute, IN
When I studied Karate, it as obvious to me that the weapon was an extension of the body. Since taking up the FMAs, I've learned that things aren't quite as simple as that! Good post.
 

jks9199

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jul 2, 2006
Messages
23,473
Reaction score
3,795
Location
Northern VA
"The weapon is an extension of the body" is, in many arts, a fallacy. Not every empty hand art is at all concerned with the weapon hand -- and to try to simply graft or shoehorn weapons into them doesn't work well. But other arts are formulated around principles that can be extended to any weapon -- whether it's a fist or a spear or (less commonly considered) a firearm.

You make an excellent point that weapon defense must consider the nature of the weapon. It's too common for a knife defense to have no realistic understanding of the edge of the knife; you can't disarm a knife in exactly the same way you can disarm a stick -- and even less so in firearms defenses. I am appalled at how many firearms defenses don't ever move the defender off the line of fire before they start struggling over the gun...
 

Rich Parsons

A Student of Martial Arts
Founding Member
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Oct 13, 2001
Messages
16,835
Reaction score
1,079
Location
Michigan
I was going over this popular idea prevalent in many martial systems: “Think of the weapon as an extension of your body”. I have a healthy respect for empty hand Martial Arts, plenty enough not to scoff at them when I see something alien to my training. But there is an inherent flaw in the design of many empty hand arts, one that has been cultivated to present, as Microsoft would say, “A feature, not a bug”.

I understand the "sticky" element in trapping and the structural needs in a classical, empty handed art. By that I mean, the reason stances, hip twisting, forward lunging and other things are set up in a way to deliver a single shot with maximum power. So there is a need for proper body structure, stancework and the like in empty hand arts. And yes, you should look at a weapon as an extension of your body…

HOWEVER


Classical blocks and stances in arts that aren't weapon-based don't consider the weapon in forms and drills. A good example of this is Wing Chun, you don't bend at the waist, bob or weave, and the blocks & parries are designed to "stick" to an opponent's arm. Furthermore, the blocks allow punches to get within a certain distance that, given the idea of a few extra inches of steel at the end of the fist, are dangerous. Add the element of the body structure, and the result will likely kill you.

This point is so often ignored, it’s usually forgotten about during “weapons” training in empty hand arts. But you must understand: Weapons use conforms to a different set of rules, and you can’t simply drag your weapon of choice through whatever empty hand regime you know and get the same results. Different systems approach weapons training with different things in mind, and I don’t want to make a sweeping generalization here, but I rarely see another practitioner or teacher from the harder styles like Karate or Kung Fu say something like “Let’s step away from Goju Ryu for a moment and see how people who have a casual familiarity with violence and blade work train it.”

Not to offend, but those I am particularly speaking of with such familiarity are the ones trained in Southeast Asian Martial Arts, often (annoyingly) referred to as “the Eclectic Arts”. (Like we’re somehow less legit because the Indonesians didn’t have Samurai, or the Filipinos don’t use Black Belts. Well, they do now, but I still remember the days…)

There are key stress points a “classically” trained martial artist presents that, to them, appear as strong defenses. And that’s not untrue, as long as we are speaking of UNARMED combat. However, a good knife fighter looks for these things. See, unlike the hands and arms, you CANNOT allow the knife to get close to your body, or play along your forearm as if it were a punch. Many classical systems give this rule up by default, using a classical block to deal with a knife. As an example, I tried to teach some basic Filipino knifework to one of my Wing Chun instructors about 8 years ago. He kept using Bong Sau (wing deflection block) to try to enter unarmed on a knife. It was a LONG time, with a lot of repeated drills to get him to actually HIT the attacking weapon arm & not block it or try to "stick" to it. Also, you cannot bring your torso/lower abdomen into the fight along with your attacking hands/weapon, because if you miss the parry or get faked out somehow, then you've just offered a good target to your opponent that didn't have a need to be there.

This is where many practitioners of classical martial arts tend to lose sight of the difference between a STYLE and a METHOD. Most styles have rules that cannot be bent for any reason, whereas a method simply says "here's the general idea...Make it work for you". Most bladed weapons don't need the "classical" body structure and alignment to kill, particularly knives. All you need is some sort of delivery system to get the blade into the target, that's it. You don't need to generate power like you would with a punch or palm strike, a sharp weapon doesn't need such. All a knife has to do is get close, the only power it needs is running along the edge. Keeping this at the forefront of your training can open up a different world for you in terms of understanding the nebulous nature of knife fighting, and when playing by the rulebook of a system vs. object practicality should be viewed with a critical eye. Again, a style will argue that you must adhere to the playbook. A method will say “I’m flexible, try out some different options with this. Let me know how it goes”.

I think that Filipino or Indonesian weapon training can help anyone in other arts as an individual grow and evolve with realization in your art. However, I recommend you keep them separate for several years, and don't try to blend them until you have a good understanding of BOTH under your belt. Otherwise, the search for "cohesive technique" will impede the learning process, and you'll constantly be looking for "Technique" instead of "Principle" which is way more important in my opinion. Don’t get hung up on stylistic differences, or loyalty issues to your school or dojo. You can train a different art for no other reason than to better understand your own.

No offense meant toward anyone, hope this post was informative.


The weapon is an extension of your body.

Just as the empty hand trained person needs to under stand the difference between a punch, a hammer fist, and knife and and even an elbow, the person working a weapon also needs to understand the attributes of the extension of their body they are using as a weapon.

If it is a blunt object one can trap it and grab it and tie it up with your hands or body.

If it is edged in some manner one cannot and also one needs to understand your on footwork even more. If you do not have a proper path for the weapon you could end up cutting yourself.

In its simplest statement the weapon is an extension of the body. But one must understand the range and attributes of the weapon to best understand the usage of the weapon. Be it an extension of the body or the body itself.
 

Hawke

Master Black Belt
Joined
Jan 10, 2007
Messages
1,067
Reaction score
24
I had an iaido instructor say the same thing.

Also a FMA instructor say the same thing.

Holding a sword compared to a knife feels so different to me.

I also move completely different do to the range of the weapon.

Interesting thing is that the outcome of using a sword or knife is the same.

Good post and more things for me to ponder.
 

Rich Parsons

A Student of Martial Arts
Founding Member
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Oct 13, 2001
Messages
16,835
Reaction score
1,079
Location
Michigan
I had an iaido instructor say the same thing.

Also a FMA instructor say the same thing.

Good techniques and god philosophy are not limited to one culture or one style. :)

Holding a sword compared to a knife feels so different to me.

The Sword should feel different it is heavier. Train with it more and holding the knife will be like it is not in your hand as the mass will not be an issue.

I also move completely different do to the range of the weapon.

Do you move differently when you are in kicking range versus punching range or stand up grappling/trapping range?

I would expect you do.

Interesting thing is that the outcome of using a sword or knife is the same.

Good post and more things for me to ponder.

If you punch or kick someone the outcome is the same, as an impact has been made.
 

MJS

Administrator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2003
Messages
30,187
Reaction score
430
Location
Cromwell,CT
IMO, this post was informative and made some very good points! :) If anything, I'd say that the FMAs or weapon based arts, will improve and blend very well with another art. Some arts that are more static in nature will become more fluid by the study of a weapon based art. This is a plus because IMO, who wants to be static in a fight?
 

Latest Discussions

Top