PDA

View Full Version : Fumio Demura's Bo Book



dsomers
22nd October 2002, 21:11
Hello everyone ,

Somone told me that in The Bo book put out by Fumio Demura Sensei , that the Kata he has in it , is either not the Kata , wrong , or the pics are in the wrong order . I have been thru a version of Shushi No Kun Sho before , and it does differ from the one I've been thru , is it just another version , or is it just a mistake ?

David Somers

tetsu
24th October 2002, 15:06
David,

Not having seen the book, I cannot comment on whether the pictures
may be misordered. In MANY M-A books, you can find instances of
editorial goof-ups.

Regarding versions, there are many versions of "Shushi". Some of
them bear ZERO resemblance to others.

Bo is one weapon that you cannot really do much self training from
books with. Basically, I believe you must already be quite well
trained to get anything out of pictures in books.

On this note, I put a challenge out to the armchair Senseis. :)

Within the last 12 months, there has been published an example of
bojutsu technique that is not possible outside the disjointed reality
of the printed page. Who here can give the initials of the publication? (Please do not be too specific as I do not want to
contribute to the uncalled for slamming of people. I'm just
curious if I'm the only person who noticed the problem :)

John Tetsu

E.elemental
27th June 2004, 00:13
Rather then starting a new thread I will ask my question here. What book dealing with the history of Kobudo/Kobujutsu would you recommend me to have read? Is there anything that I "must" have read according to you if I am interrested in the subject? Perheps something by Patrick Mcarthy, but in that case, which book of the many he has written?


I am not really interested in books with many pictures (well some of course). But not the entire book with just some text in it. :D


Thanks.

Shikiyanaka
29th June 2004, 11:18
@Patrik: yould would be best off if you would start to gather what you are able to get your hands on. I guess there is not one book which explains everything worth knowing at once. Furthermore, this is a complex matter, comprised of a whole world of terminology for technique, people, history, etc. Most often, one style is being introduced. Fumio Demura, for example (who I was able to watch at the summer course in Kamen recently), has been a student of Sakagami Ryusho. This means, he is Taira lineage, buuut Sakagami himself was Bujutsu master in his own right... So you would first have to look for what lineage or style you would be interested in.

The only way to get through it is to get one picture as a whole.

As to your description what you are looking for, I would suggest to you:
Sells, John: Unante. The Secrets of Karate. Hawley Publications, 1996. (there is a new revised edition of this, called Unante II. It is explaining the different styles.) It deals with Te and Kobudō, and I guess this is the only correct approach, because it always belonged together and is inseparable.


Some hints on major style writings:
Chinen Kenyu: Kobudo d'Okinawa. Sedirep, Paris 1985.
Demura Fumio: Sai. Karate Weapon of Self-Defense. Ohara Publications, Santa Clarita, 1974.
Inoue Motokatsu. Ryūkyū Kobudō. Jōkan - Gekan (3 Volumes). 1972-1974. Japanese only.
Inoue Motokatsu: Ten no Maki. Bō, Sai, Tonfa and Nunchaku. Ancient Martial Arts of the Ryūkyū Islands. Seitosha, Tōkyō 1987. English and Japanese.
Inoue Motokatsu: Chi no Maki. Nichōgama, Surujin, Tinbe, Tekkō. Ancient Martial Arts of the Ryūkyū Islands. Seitosha, Tōkyō 1987. English and Japanese.
Matayoshi Kobudō Tōde-dō Enbu Taikai. Not openly published, I guess. 40 pages.
McCarthy, Patrick und Yuriko: Ancient Okinawan Martial Arts. Volume One. Koryu Uchinadi. Tuttle Publishing, Boston – Rutland, VT – Toyko, 1999. ISBN: 0804820937. (This has a translation of Taira Shinken's Ryūkyū Kobudō Taikan from 1964 or so.)
Ko Taira Shinken Senshi Nana Shūki Tsuitō. Karate Dō, Kobudō Enbu Taikai. Taira Shinken Den. 1977. Not openly published, I guess. 33
pages.
Sakagami Ryūshō: Ancient Martial Arts of the Ryūkyū Islands. Series I. The Basic Formal Exercise of Nunchaku. Tokaido, Tōkyō 1969. 14 pages. English and Japanese.
Sakagami Ryūshō: Ancient Martial Arts of the Ryūkyū Islands. Series II. Sai of Tsukenshitahaku. Tokaido, Tōkyō 1972. 20 pages. English and Japanese.
Sakagami Ryūshō: Ancient Martial Arts of the Ryūkyū Islands. Series III. The Basic Formal Exercise of Tonfa of Hamahiga. Tokaido, Tōkyō 1974. 37 pages. English and Japanese.
Schoenberger, Gerhard: Kobudo. Traditionelle Waffenkunst aus dem Fernen Osten. Domus Editoria Europaea, Frankfurz a.M., 1992.
Taira Shinken: Ryūkyū Kobudō Taikan. (New compiled and enhanced edition of the Enzyclopedia of Ryūkyū Kobudō.) Supervised by Inoue Kishō. Commentary by Miyagi Tokumasa. Yōju Shorin, 1997. (Japanese only!)
Yamashita Tadashi: Advanced Tonfa. Japanese Weapon of Self-Defense. Ohara Publications, Santa Clarita, 1987.

Apart from that, there are many lesser known traditions in many of the Karate dojo, which I guess only will be discovered by this and the next generation of Okinawa martial arts tourists ;)

regards

Shikiyanaka
29th June 2004, 11:46
Also, check the links to some of the main ryūha:

Okinawa Dento Kobudo Hozonkai Bunbukan (Okinawa) (http://www2.tontonme.ne.jp/users/bunbukan/index(english).htm)
Ryukyu Kobudo Hozon Shinkokai (currently unavailable)(Okinawa) (http://www.ryukyu-kobudo.com/)
Ryukyu Kobudo Tesshinkan(Okinawa) (http://www.geocities.com/isshintesshinkobudo/)
Ryukyu Kobujutsu Hozon Shinkokai (Japan) (http://www.paw.hi-ho.ne.jp/ryukyu-kbujut/)
Karate and Kobudo on the website of Okinawa Prefecture (http://www.wonder-okinawa.jp/en/23.html)(Contributors (http://www.wonder-okinawa.jp/023/eng/015/index.html))

Regards

E.elemental
29th June 2004, 13:11
Originally posted by Shikiyanaka
As to your description what you are looking for, I would suggest to you:
Sells, John: Unante. The Secrets of Karate. Hawley Publications, 1996. (there is a new revised edition of this, called Unante II. It is explaining the different styles.) It deals with Te and Kobudō, and I guess this is the only correct approach, because it always belonged together and is inseparable.




This sounds lika a good place to start, and of course you are quite right in stating that Te and Kobudo have been like two wheels, they belong together. Not everyone nows this, some get very puzzled since they consider Karate and most of its history to be a weaponless art.

I train with the Ryu Kyu Kobujutsu Hozon Shinko Kai in Sweden, so I have some of Inoue Sensei`s books, not the Japanesee although. :D So the Taira lineage is of course of interest for me, but I am also interested in other lineages. I think that book of Patrick Mcarthy, Ancient Okinawan Martial Arts (Volume One) also could be very intersting.

Good now I have two books to start with, thanks for your advice.
:)

Our homepage, some in english.

http://www.rkhsk.se

Shikiyanaka
29th June 2004, 13:23
I train with the Ryu Kyu Kobujutsu Hozon Shinko Kai in Sweden I think there is picture in the Ten no Maki of your Sensei in Sweden, isn't it?


I think that book of Patrick Mcarthy, Ancient Okinawan Martial Arts (Volume One) also could be very intersting.
Definetely. I've got it also.

If you are into old pics, you however should also try to get a copy of the Japanese language new edition of Ryūkyū Kobudō Taikan (supervised by Inoue Kishō). It has the original pics of Taira for the Kata; and also some very nice additions on history from different sources (story of Hama Higa Pechin; Nakasone Genwa's early coverage on Taira Shinken with Kata drawings etc.; a copy of Taira Shinkens handwriting, otherwise also owned by Kinjō Hiroshi; Ryūkyū Shinpō article Funakoshi etc.). There are only 800 copies, and interestingly the cover writing of the ideograms "Ryūkyū Kobudō Taikan" has been done by Fujita Seiko :)

Old Dragon
22nd May 2005, 18:19
Hello everyone ,

Somone told me that in The Bo book put out by Fumio Demura Sensei , that the Kata he has in it , is either not the Kata , wrong , or the pics are in the wrong order . I have been thru a version of Shushi No Kun Sho before , and it does differ from the one I've been thru , is it just another version , or is it just a mistake ?

David Somers



David:

I know this is an old thread but since the thread took another turn and nobody seemed to really answer your questions thought I might just fill it in for you.

Fumio Demura trained with Taira Shinken, the changes in the kata from his are minimal and primarily deal with stance. Mr. Demura changed them himself for his own reasons. In detail I cannot tell you the reasons but he told me this himself. His Shushi No Kun Sho is almost identical to The two main Ryu Kyu Kobudo styles. (Hozon Shin ku kai and Tesshin kan) I talked to Mr. Demura in 2000 and asked him this exact question. I know that specifically he removed the back stance because it is so hard on the knees. This change coinsides with his style differences with Shotokan. Shito Ryu and Shotokan have similar roots but one of the main differences was things like elimination of back stance.

His explanations were locical and after all he is head of one of the largest systems around so I guess he has the right to change what he felt, to his own ideas.


Mike O'Leary

dsomers
23rd May 2005, 17:03
I dont have his book readily available off hand , but if I remember correctly the embusen was a bit different , and he added some figure 8's in or something , as well . I might be off on that , as I have the book packed away , but I think I distinctly rember those differences .

Old Dragon
23rd May 2005, 17:36
I dont have his book readily available off hand , but if I remember correctly the embusen was a bit different , and he added some figure 8's in or something , as well . I might be off on that , as I have the book packed away , but I think I distinctly rember those differences .

Yes his embusan was different, If I remember correctly the kata was basiclly the same, but hey, I'm old and it was his kata in 2000 we compared, the book I read years ago and like you dont have it readily available. \

I was at a tournament last year and as I was judging someone did Shushi no kun sho, to me it was unrecognizable. I dont remember his style but his sensei readily admitted that it had been "modified" for tournament. Not that way I would do it but definatly a factor in how things change.

I think the basic point was that Demura had admitted changing things for his own purposes, at least they were logical and thought out changes that he wanted to introduce or adapt to his style, not simply for tournament.

Mike O'Leary

Troll Basher
24th May 2005, 01:48
I train with the Ryu Kyu Kobujutsu Hozon Shinko Kai in Sweden, so I have some of Inoue Sensei`s books, not the Japanesee although. :D So the Taira lineage is of course of interest for me, but I am also interested in other lineages. I think that book of Patrick Mcarthy, Ancient Okinawan Martial Arts (Volume One) also could be very intersting.

Good now I have two books to start with, thanks for your advice.
:)

Our homepage, some in english.

http://www.rkhsk.se

I read an interesting article by a guy named Estrada who was a student of Hohan Soken. In the article Estrada interviews Hohan about his training and so on. One of the things Hohan says is when Taira Shinken wanted to learn his kobudo he deliberately changed it so Taira wouldn’t get the “true” version. Why he did this I don’t know……..just something to think about when discussing Taira Shinken’s kobudo.
I have also heard that Akamine's version is different than Inoue's.....

Old Dragon
24th May 2005, 03:41
I read an interesting article by a guy named Estrada who was a student of Hohan Soken. In the article Estrada interviews Hohan about his training and so on. One of the things Hohan says is when Taira Shinken wanted to learn his kobudo he deliberately changed it so Taira wouldn’t get the “true” version. Why he did this I don’t know……..just something to think about when discussing Taira Shinken’s kobudo.
I have also heard that Akamine's version is different than Inoue's.....



I learned Choun no kun from Kotoro Iha, he is a matayoshi lineage student. First we learned kata then we learned a 2 man kobudo drill, in the drill (bunkai) of the kata there were some slight changes to "make the drill work" I asked him about this and to both him, his brother and my sensei it was no big deal because we dont change the kata, just the moves in the kata for bunkai in order to make the drill flow. I have talked to several other okinawans from other styles and as long as you dont change the kata, adjusting the moves to make a bunkai drill is apparently common. These are not drastic changes but adding or changing a move, especially on a turn or transiton to make a smooth or logical change in direction or transition to the next line or section of the kata.

Mike O'Leary

Troll Basher
24th May 2005, 05:35
I learned Choun no kun from Kotoro Iha, he is a matayoshi lineage student. First we learned kata then we learned a 2 man kobudo drill, in the drill (bunkai) of the kata there were some slight changes to "make the drill work" I asked him about this and to both him, his brother and my sensei it was no big deal because we dont change the kata, just the moves in the kata for bunkai in order to make the drill flow. I have talked to several other okinawans from other styles and as long as you dont change the kata, adjusting the moves to make a bunkai drill is apparently common. These are not drastic changes but adding or changing a move, especially on a turn or transiton to make a smooth or logical change in direction or transition to the next line or section of the kata.

Mike O'Leary

That's all well and good. However in the article writen by Estrada it was stated that Hohan changed the kata movements and showed Taira an incorrect version.

Old Dragon
24th May 2005, 07:15
That's all well and good. However in the article writen by Estrada it was stated that Hohan changed the kata movements and showed Taira an incorrect version.



Now I could be proven wrong, but books like Zen Kobudo dont even list Hohan as being associated with Taira Shinken. He was a student of Yabiku Moden. Between that and a few other readings I am looking at here there is no mention of Hohan being of any great influence to Taira.

Mike O'leary

Troll Basher
24th May 2005, 07:23
From the Estrada interview:

Soken Sensei: Yes, they are the same and they are not the same. You say you lived on Okinawa for five years but you cannot understand the Okinawan people. In the old days, when we were really Okinawan and not Japanese, many of the old people were not smart -- or as smart as they are today. They did not travel, they did not watch TV, many never left their villages unless they had to. What we did have was festivals... village festivals. Everyone would come and watch and learn.

These village people would watch the other fancy city people practice their ti or their methods of weaponry. Say, like... well, ... Yes, a kata that they knew or practiced had a number of movements. They come to the city and see city kata with some of the same movements. The city kata had a name... and maybe their kata did not have a name. So, they would go back and ... yes, you now understand. They would name their kata after the city kata because they had a few of the same movements.

Some of their kata had five or maybe ten movements. Taira, my friend, would go to the village and learn these kata. He says that he learn 500 kata this way! Wah! He says that this is true but he also likes to tell stories. Some of these kata had only 3 or maybe 5 movements. 500 kata, yes, now that is funny but he was a history collector. He knew them but he didn't understand them.

Estrada: Was Taira a friend or student? He is very famous for his weaponry in Japan.

Hohan Sensei: Yes, Taira... he knew a lot of kata, huh. Huh, huh, huh... Yes, he is dead, you know that. He would watch my kata all the time and try to learn my tsuken style stick. But I would trick him and change the kata, wah!! ... just like that. He would still come back and look some more in the hopes of being able to take it back. When we both were young -- our karate was very good. When we both got old, our weaponry was good.

E.elemental
24th May 2005, 14:25
I read an interesting article by a guy named Estrada who was a student of Hohan Soken. In the article Estrada interviews Hohan about his training and so on. One of the things Hohan says is when Taira Shinken wanted to learn his kobudo he deliberately changed it so Taira wouldn’t get the “true” version. Why he did this I don’t know……..just something to think about when discussing Taira Shinken’s kobudo.
I have also heard that Akamine's version is different than Inoue's.....

First it would be interesting to read the whole interview. In this one he only states that "- I knew Taira Shinken very well before he died. I taught him some of my older forms." (http://www.fightingarts.com/reading/article.php?id=426) Second I have never seen that Hohan Soken is reffered to as one of Taira Sensei teachers. Primerely that is Sensei Yabiku Moden, and others are Kanagawa Gimu, Funakoshi Gichin, Mabuni Kenwa and Kamiya Jinsei (Mccarthy, 1999). And in the translation of "Ryukyu Kobudo Taikan" of Eihachi Ota (2003) only Yabiku Moden is mentioned. So really I dont find any reason to have this in mind because Taira Sensei recieved his certificate from Sensei Yabiku Moden and not Hohan Soken.

And yes you have heard that Sensei Akamine teaches different then Sensei Inoue? Rumors are great, this way anything can be true. Not that I am any expert on the subject, I have some little experience within the Inoue lineage and I have seen some from Akamine lineage from the film "Taira Shinken - Father of Ryukyu Kobudo". Everything is not identical, but if this has to do with organisation or individual differences really I can not tell. What I have seen its very much the same, but thats to expect from two of Taira Sensei best students, Sensei Akamine Eisuke and Sensei Inoue Motokatsu.

Troll Basher
24th May 2005, 14:41
And yes you have heard that Sensei Akamine teaches different then Sensei Inoue? Rumors are great, this way anything can be true. Not that I am any expert on the subject, I have some little experience within the Inoue lineage and I have seen some from Akamine lineage from the film "Taira Shinken - Father of Ryukyu Kobudo". Everything is not identical, but if this has to do with organisation or individual differences really I can not tell. What I have seen its very much the same, but thats to expect from two of Taira Sensei best students, Sensei Akamine Eisuke and Sensei Inoue Motokatsu.


Actually I heard it from someone that studied from them both.........

E.elemental
24th May 2005, 15:42
Actually I heard it from someone that studied from them both.........

Well since I dont have the slightest clue about who this is I cant really argue. Most likely he has more experience in Kobudo then I have. But in that case I would like him in his own words describe his opinion with the possibility to ask him questions. I want info directly from the source, many things can happen on the way.

About 6 months ago I trained with a person that from 1998 and forwards have visited (I do not know how often he has visited and how much of that he teaches that is directly from Sensei Akamine) Akamine Sensei, and in the Katas and Kumite we did I really couldnt see any difference. Perhaps it is and many others do not agree with me, this is most likely since we all se differently on things. What I say until I have seen otherwise is that there is many more things that is similar then different in the two lineages.

Doug Daulton
24th May 2005, 18:19
Interesting thread everyone. Here are a few more gristly bits on which to chew. :)

Taira Shinken and his teachers

The Taira line has five primary descendant lineages in our era: Akamine, Inoue, Minowa, Nakamoto and Sakagami. Based on my research, I think it safe to say that all five lines would consider bo waza the “spine” of their Kobudo traditions. With this in mind, I think few would argue with the notion that Moden Yabiku, Higa Jinsaburo, Akamine Yohei, Higa Raisuke, Higa Seichiro and Mabuni Kenwa were Taira’s earliest and most influential teachers. Like all of us, he picked up additional insights and even embusen from many people over his many years of travel and training.

For those interested, have a look at my attempt at a complete lineage chart for Taira (http://okinawakobudo.com/content/article_taira/figure_19_taira_lineage.pdf).

Taira and “true” kata

As illustrated above and noted in the Estrada interview, Taira was not a student of Hohan Soken per se. Rather, in his effort to capture, collect and preserve Ryukyu Kobudo as dying art form, he traveled extensively and tried to make a record of all the kata/embusen he could. This brought him in contact with many, many teachers. In some cases, these teachers understood his intent and were very open with him. In others, they intentionally misrepresented the techniques to hide their true intention.

Here is my take on the situation. Some could say these teachers did not think Taira worthy of the knowledge so they did not share the true waza. However, Taira was/is highly regarded as a competent and skilled budoka. So, that does not seem likely. If teachers were willing to accurately share the waza, it almost certain that Taira would have been able to grasp the concepts and incorporate them into Ryukyu Kobudo Hozon Shinkokai.

What makes most sense to me is that Taira and his generation were at the tail end of an era when revealing the secrets on one’s art could, in a very real sense, get one killed. And, equally important, revealing such things to an outsider would be treasonous to one’s teachers. So, despite Taira’s noble intentions to keep Ryukyu Kobudo from fading into antiquity, some teachers, elected to obscure the techniques from Taira.

In the end, there is no good guy or bad guy here. Like each of us, each teacher made a choice, based on the best available information, which they thought would best honor their obligation to the art and to the teachers of the art who came before them. Some saw Taira as a seed into which to plant the seed of the next generation. Others, like Hohan Soken, did not.

The value of seeking the "real” kata?

This discussion/argument is incredibly frustrating to me, particularly in the modern era. Mainly, I think it is a pointless. Even in mainland koryu traditions, where kata and waza have been codified and written in kakemono for countless generations, folks disagree about how deep a stance should be or at which angle the attack/defense should be applied. In Ryukyu Kobudo and Te, matters are made more confusing by the fact that there is far less written history and much of what existed was destroyed in World War II.

Then, throw out written reference altogether because it was never intended as a guide for the beginner/intermediate student. Rather, it was, at least in my opinion, intended as a tool to jog the memory of the most senior teachers so they could rediscover, through the body’s memory, waza which may have grown rusty while focusing on kihon to with the next generation.

When students become too legalistic or literal in their search for the “right way” they almost invariably lose sight of the best resource available to them … their teachers. Like all difficult physical endeavors (dance, gymnastics, etc), budo is learned and retained in the proprioceptive (muscle) memory of the body. So, the best place to learn it is from someone who has done it well exponentially more times than you.

Also, over-reliance on “the right way” more often than not completely overlooks the fact that waza must be adjusted to the individual’s body. This does not mean that a 6’ 4” person need not learn how to squat low in shiko-dachi … proper position is needed to apply proper waza. However, because of the height difference the tall person will always seem “too high” to the uneducated eye. And, if this is the case, the tall person may drive himself into a stance so low that it both causes long-term joint damage and renders the waza too slow and cumbersome to be effective.

Too many people try to mirror the visual appearance of a technique and completely miss the intent/application, which is really the lynchpin. Students need to be mirrors of their teachers’ martial intent and knowledge of APPLIED waza. In focusing on this, our bodies will naturally shape themselves to the positions required for the actual application of a given waza.

Bringing this conversation full circle, Taira knew well this human tendency to “parrot” one’s teacher to the point of one’s own detriment. With this mind, he knew his own students would suffer if they focused on his visual representation of stances. An early leg injury made it difficult to properly illustrate correct stance and gamanku (hip power). So, he developed a relationship with Higa Yuchoku of Shorin-ryu. As a result, Higa sat with Taira when he tested his students. Taira corrected their kobudo waza and Higa corrected their stances and gamanku.

So, who has the “true” kata?

In my opinion, everyone can … if his or her waza is fundamentally sound and correctly applied. Kata is like a song. If the notes (waza) are off-key, no variation of that song will sound good to the ear. However, if the musician playing the song is fundamentally sound and experienced enough to know how to apply notes (waza), tempo (pace/timing) and volume (power/strength), then the song can have many variations, all of which ring true.

Best of luck in your training,

Doug Daulton

PS: For a comprehensive history of Taira’s life and the Taira->Akamine line, check out the following links. I’ll forewarn you that I am the author of both articles, so I am a little biased. :D

While I think these are two of the best-researched references currently available, I am not so bold to claim they are the best references possible. At the bottom of the Taira article, you will find a complete bibliography and list of citations. I invite everyone to do you own research and add to the growing body of knowledge on the topic.

1) One Man’s Mark: Taira Shinken’s impact on the modern study of Ryukyuan weapons (http://okinawakobudo.com/content.php?page=media_article_taira)

2) A Cultural Legacy: The Biography of Akamine Eisuke (http://okinawakobudo.com/content.php?page=media_article_akamine)

Finally, read anything you can get your hands on by Harry Cook, Charles Goodin, Mario McKenna. In my opinion, they are the most active and dedicated English-language historians of karate and kobudo around today.

Old Dragon
17th June 2005, 05:34
Well since I dont have the slightest clue about who this is I cant really argue. Most likely he has more experience in Kobudo then I have. But in that case I would like him in his own words describe his opinion with the possibility to ask him questions. I want info directly from the source, many things can happen on the way.

About 6 months ago I trained with a person that from 1998 and forwards have visited (I do not know how often he has visited and how much of that he teaches that is directly from Sensei Akamine) Akamine Sensei, and in the Katas and Kumite we did I really couldnt see any difference. Perhaps it is and many others do not agree with me, this is most likely since we all se differently on things. What I say until I have seen otherwise is that there is many more things that is similar then different in the two lineages.



I trained with Tamayose Hidemi before Akamine sensei died, after his death Tamayose sensei formed ryu kyu kobudo tesshin kan, at that time also we were told of some subtle changes to basics, not changes in the move but on timing and emphasis... (basic #8) to look at the sequence you have to look twice to realise they are the same, and they are... but there were definite changes in emphasis... One more way that things evolve. Interestingly enough we now practice it both ways, acknowledging what was akamine's and what is Tamayose sensei's.

Mike O'Leary

Robby Bray
21st June 2005, 03:58
Well said Doug.