Karate Kneeling Defences (Wado, Shotokan and Others?)

Really interesting topic here, I dont know much about this so I'm really looking forward to hearing some views on the history side of things.

I dont practise any of the drills specifically shown in the Kyohan book. However I do practise kata applications in various different positions (one of them being kneeling). So inadvertently I practise the same way as Funakoshi.

We use kneeling drills a lot more for our young kids class. We find it safer to teach masses of children how to roll somebody onto their backs from a kneeling position than to teach them all a throw from standing. We have also found they enjoy it more, due to not having to be thrown.

The adults use kneeling drills too. But thats usually because they get too lazy and tired too continue getting to their feet when they start a technique from standing

Final point, kicking from the ground is a vital skill should we end up on our backs. We still practise this as part of our escape training.

My two cents--

I don't know personally if the Ryukuans traditionally used the seiza pose for basic sitting to the same degree as the Japanese prior to the 1609 occupation (Anybody?).  Post occupation, however, we need to assume that they would have been at least 'exposed' to this method of sitting (also probably a safe assumption looking at other Asian cultures).  So, for them, training for this method of defense would be virtually the same as us doing 'seated' chair defense, 'vehicle defense', and the like today. 

Guro Dan Inosanto is on record in something I have seen saying that the Dutch required the native Malay to begin to sit cross-legged (i.e. what we sometimes call 'Indian style' here in the States) based on the native ability to come out of the traditional 'suwah' or python position with blinding speed and kris in hand.  So, they made them sit cross legged as an impediment to potential assassins.

Funaksohi's comment cited above seems to stress (at least to my read), that his methods were simply 'basic' [i.e. standing] methods applied from a kneeling position.  From a training standpoint, this is also the most sensible approach as well... why would I want separate tactics for kneeling positions?  From a principle-centric training standpoint, I wouldn't; personally I would want students to adapt concepts to that positional variation.  However, I doubt that that will be a controversial idea.

So, we do not practice any drills from the mutual and formal 'seiza' kneeling position, although we do practice seated defenses and 'assymetric' type grappling and self protection driills in our system (i.e. 'one up one down' drills).  And anyway, looking at the video, one notes that the 'attacker' comes OUT of seiza and rises into a forward kneeling posistion to initiate an attack in most cases anyway.

So, to me the legacy of 'starting' the drill in a mutual seiza is at best a formal cultural ritual / legacy relic depending on POV.

Any Wadoka out there care to hazard a guess as to 'why the big step' away at 1:08?  Beyond moving away from the threat, whcih is a rather obvious concept, the positioning seemed quite specific to me.

Idori number two is one of the best 'applications' I have seen for Pinan Sandan in a long time, if it works the way its shown.  The hand and body positioning is right there.

All of the kneeling defenses that are shown in those books are based on a Koryu Bujutsu school called Shindo Yoshin Ryu techniques. Otsuka was proficient in jujutsu before he met Funakoshi. Otsuka taught Funakoshi those techinques and at the time Funakoshi wanted to make a truly comprehensive book on the art of Karate. In the neptune publication of Karate-Do Kyohan you will notice that Otsuka was there for the throwing and kneeling defenses as Uke to Funakoshi; and tori (uchitachi, or what ever term you like to use) for knife and sword defenses with the Uke being one of his students.   These Koryu, or old school techniques, were taught to begin teaching concepts of jujutsu. In Wado they represent the higher levels of jujutsu.  Kneeling defenses were a common necisity in pre-meji era Japan, also they don't allow for much cheating. I..E. if you don't understand the principle it shows and you will have a difficult time with the technique. If you understand the underlining principles of the techniques then you can apply it standing kneeling or on your back. If you rely soley on your strength then you miss the point of jujutsu.

BTW I train with Tatsuo Suzuki and have recieved all of my dan grades and assistant teaching licenses from him. I also study Shindo Yoshin Ryu

"The Shindo Yoshin-ryu tradition was founded late in the Edo period by a Kuroda clan retainer named Katsunosuke Matsuoka (1836–1898) Katsunosuke was born in Edo-Hantei, the Edo headquarters of the Kuroda clan in 1836. Katsunosuke opened his first dojo in 1858 in the Asakusa district of Edo where he taught Tenjin Shinyo-ryu jujutsu"

From Wikipedia

Now we are getting somewhere - Tenjin Shinyo ryu, along with Kito Ryu, were Kano's primary influences for Judo's grappling and throwing techniques - so there is a shared root right there which explains why the kneeling techniques might have been "preserved" in Wado/Shotokan via Ohtsuka and Kodokan Judo via Kano. This assumes that Matsuoka drew on Tenjin-Shinyo in the foundation of his own ryu of course, but I'm guessing that is likely. I'd be interested when Shindo Yoshin Ryu established itself. I know Kime-no-kata, containing Judo's Idori, dates from 1888.

Here is a link to the lineiage of Shindo Yoshn ryu... and not form Wiki...

http://www.shinyokai.com/lineage.htm

As you can see Nakamura Yoshin Koryu, Akiyama Yoshin ryu, Hokushin Itto Ryu, and Shinkage ryu, are the furthest back roots that it has. Tenjin Shinyo Ryu, was latter introduced and Hokushin Itto ryu, Jikishinkage ryu, and Matsuzaki Shinkage ryu are present, in one of the surviving branches, Takmura Ha Shindo Yoshin Ryu. 

Also You know, it's funny that picture you chose to use with Funakoshi and Otsuka doing Idori, also describes a Tanto dori, knife defense, technique. In modern WIKF terms it would be Tanto dori 6.. or in Karate-do Taikan it is called Unga Dori (Cloud Self Disarm technique #3) page reference 42 and 296 of the Mario McKenna edition.

Hi All,

Matthew Matson wrote:

Also You know, it's funny that picture you chose to use with Funakoshi and Otsuka doing Idori, also describes a Tanto dori, knife defense, technique. In modern WIKF terms it would be Tanto dori 6.. or in Karate-do Taikan it is called Unga Dori (Cloud Self Disarm technique #3) page reference 42 and 296 of the Mario McKenna edition.

They do look similar don’t they! Thanks for pointing that out. Otsuka describes the kick in Unga-dori as a kick to the groin (looks like a round kick in the photo); whereas Funakoshi’s is a side kick to the ribs. Both involve dropping to the side and kicking through. Also interesting that the knife kata that Otsuka describes in Taikan, of which unga-dori is one part, has a very similar “formal presentation” to the judo kata that sparked this topic of conversation. I find these similarities fascinating!

Matthew Matson wrote:

All of the kneeling defenses that are shown in those books are based on a Koryu Bujutsu school called Shindo Yoshin Ryu techniques. Otsuka was proficient in jujutsu before he met Funakoshi. Otsuka taught Funakoshi those techniques and at the time Funakoshi wanted to make a truly comprehensive book on the art of Karate.

I would have to question the certainty of the first sentence, in particular the use of the word “all”. As mentioned in the tread starter, Funakoshi attributes five of the six kneeling techniques he demonstrates directly to named traditional karate kata. You can also quite clearly see the connection he describes. Although it is certain that Otsuka had an influence on the methods shown in Kyohan, I don’t think it would be right to say that all kneeling techniques find their origins in Shindo Yoshin Ryu Jujutsu. Funakoshi certainly says otherwise himself.

I think it would be more accurate to say that Funakoshi drew on his knowledge of karate kata to show some examples of how karate methods could be adapted for application from a kneeling position; in order to show karate as a complete system that also covered such eventualities. Otuska was consulted as part of the process and there is no doubt he and Shindo Yoshin Ryu had a strong influence on what was eventually presented.

I don’t think we can ignore karate kata as the basis for the methods shown, and claim Shindo Yoshin Ryu as the core source, when Funakoshi states that what he shows is, “simply an application of basic kata”, he then goes on to name the kata specifically, and the techniques shown have a strong coloration with the kata named i.e. the grip break attributed to the “hammer-fist” of Heian Shodan (Pinan Nidan) on number 1, the age-uke, pull and punch attributed to Jion in number 3 and number 4, the grip loosen and elbow attributed to Heian Sandan in number 5, etc.

No doubt that Otuska’s Shindo Yoshin Ryu had a strong influence on those methods too (maybe even the original idea of including kneeling methods in the book?), but I think when discussing upon what the Kyohan kneeling methods are primarily based, we need to take what Funakoshi shows and says and give that accolade to the kata; not Shindo Yoshin Ryu.

MikeT wrote:

So, we do not practice any drills from the mutual and formal 'seiza' kneeling position, although we do practice seated defenses and 'assymetric' type grappling and self protection drills in our system (i.e. 'one up one down' drills).  And anyway, looking at the video, one notes that the 'attacker' comes OUT of seiza and rises into a forward kneeling position to initiate an attack in most cases anyway.

This is something I was thinking about yesterday after leaving the office. I had stated that we do no formal kneeling methods from seiza due to their cultural irrelevance. And while that is true, it is common for us to begin ground fighting practise from such a position (i.e. both people kneeling and facing each other). We therefore, by default, spend some time wrestling from this initial position. They way I practise has much in common with what MikeT describes, but by default I think we are also more than adequately prepared for the remote “seiza scenario” too.

Matthew Matson wrote:

Kneeling defenses were a common necessity in pre-meji era Japan, also they don't allow for much cheating. I..E. if you don't understand the principle it shows and you will have a difficult time with the technique. If you understand the underlining principles of the techniques then you can apply it standing kneeling or on your back. If you rely solely on your strength then you miss the point of jujutsu.

That’s a really good point and I’d not thought of kneeling practise from that perspective. We do quite a bit of punching while sitting and kneeling (and other awkward positions too) so that the students learn to generate power from wherever that are. This is a practise we adopted from Geoff Thompson and his restricted punching drills (Al Peasland also has some great material on this). As Matthew says, it does test internalisation of principle as you are forced to make it work in less than ideal circumstances. I had not thought of seiza drills from that perspective before and that makes sense; although I would say that non-compliance would needed at some point to truly test understanding of principle from that position.

The interesting thing for me in this tread has been that although I don’t do any formal kneeling defences, we do practise striking and fighting from a kneeling position though and the thread has made me realise I do more from this position that perhaps I first realised! And that practise from this position can have benefits outside its direct “cultural” application. Interesting stuff!

All the best,

Iain

I personally feel that the introduction of seated technique practice (iai/idori/ suwariwaza or whatever term you wish to use) into karate came as part of its campaign for acceptance into the mainstream of Japanese marital arts and would not have been a widespread practice on Okinawa pre-meiji. As a staple of mainland classical martial training it would immediately give the fledgeling karate an air of belonging and respect in much the same way that a competitive aspect gave it the new progressive flavour of judo and kendo. As far as I know seated practice like this does not exist anywhere in Chinese martial arts or in the many other sout heast Asian systems that influenced karate and is very much a Japanese cultural idea.  If it were a central part of the karate method from that time then I feel that such things would be clearly shown in the solo kata and they are not.

This is of course entirely seperate from the applicability and or effectiveness of such training today.

Iain Abernethy wrote:

I would have to question the certainty of the first sentence, in particular the use of the word “all”. As mentioned in the tread starter, Funakoshi attributes five of the six kneeling techniques he demonstrates directly to named traditional karate kata. You can also quite clearly see the connection he describes. Although it is certain that Otsuka had an influence on the methods shown in Kyohan, I don’t think it would be right to say that all kneeling techniques find their origins in Shindo Yoshin Ryu Jujutsu. Funakoshi certainly says otherwise himself.

I think it would be more accurate to say that Funakoshi drew on his knowledge of karate kata to show some examples of how karate methods could be adapted for application from a kneeling position; in order to show karate as a complete system that also covered such eventualities. Otuska was consulted as part of the process and there is no doubt he and Shindo Yoshin Ryu had a strong influence on what was eventually presented.

I don’t think we can ignore karate kata as the basis for the methods shown, and claim Shindo Yoshin Ryu as the core source, when Funakoshi states that what he shows is, “simply an application of basic kata”, he then goes on to name the kata specifically, and the techniques shown have a strong coloration with the kata named i.e. the grip break attributed to the “hammer-fist” of Heian Shodan (Pinan Nidan) on number 1, the age-uke, pull and punch attributed to Jion in number 3 and number 4, the grip loosen and elbow attributed to Heian Sandan in number 5, etc.

No doubt that Otuska’s Shindo Yoshin Ryu had a strong influence on those methods too (maybe even the original idea of including kneeling methods in the book?), but I think when discussing upon what the Kyohan kneeling methods are primarily based, we need to take what Funakoshi shows and says and give that accolade to the kata; not Shindo Yoshin Ryu

Well as a practitioner of both Wado and SYR, the images and descriptions are very familiar, in fact they are but slight variations of what we do as kneeling kata or they are exactly the same... I believe that Funakoshi was just trying to justify adding them in to the cirriculium by extroplating principle in to kata that he found similiar...

Gavin J Poffley wrote:

I personally feel that the introduction of seated technique practice (iai/idori/ suwariwaza or whatever term you wish to use) into karate came as part of its campaign for acceptance into the mainstream of Japanese marital arts and would not have been a widespread practice on Okinawa pre-meiji. As a staple of mainland classical martial training it would immediately give the fledgeling karate an air of belonging and respect in much the same way that a competitive aspect gave it the new progressive flavour of judo and kendo. As far as I know seated practice like this does not exist anywhere in Chinese martial arts or in the many other sout heast Asian systems that influenced karate and is very much a Japanese cultural idea.  If it were a central part of the karate method from that time then I feel that such things would be clearly shown in the solo kata and they are not.

This is of course entirely seperate from the applicability and or effectiveness of such training today.

I have to agree with Gavin, plus Donn Drager said pretty much the same thing when he lived in Japan and reviewed Funakoshi's karate. Also I think we should consider the following questions.

1. Why did Funakoshi do this?

2. What were the differences between Funakoshi's karate before he modified it to fit Japanese culture, and were kneeling positions in it originally.

3. Why does these kneeling tactics not appear in other styles of Okinawan karate?

4. Funakoshi freely admits to modifying his karate to suite the Japanese, so what else did he modiffy.

5. Was Funakoshi the most qualified karate-ka to make these changes?

6. Was Funakoshi being totally honest and upfront in his books when he gave the reasons for including these tactics/techniques in his karate? I mean after all, Motobu had doubts about Funakoshi, others too from what I've heard.

Mike R

Gavin J Poffley wrote:

I personally feel that the introduction of seated technique practice (iai / idori/ suwariwaza or whatever term you wish to use) into karate came as part of its campaign for acceptance into the mainstream of Japanese marital arts and would not have been a widespread practice on Okinawa pre-meiji.

I think that is very likely. As karate moves to mainland Japan it needs to be made “Japanese”. The presentation of such techniques would be a be a part of the wider process that also involved “Chinese hand” to “empty hand”, giving the kata Japanese names, aping aspects of established arts such as judo, etc.

I also think we can be pretty safe that it was not a widespread practise as Funakoshi says as much, “Iai [kneeling drills] also does not have any fixed kata from the old times …”

I’m still interested to know if any practitioners of styles other than Wado and Shotokan ever include kneeling drills in their practise though?

Matthew Matson wrote:

Well as a practitioner of both Wado and SYR, the images and descriptions are very familiar, in fact they are but slight variations of what we do as kneeling kata or they are exactly the same... I believe that Funakoshi was just trying to justify adding them in to the curriculum by extrapolating principle in to kata that he found similar...

It’s true that they are similar, but they are also similar to methods found in Aikido and Judo and that does not suggest a common source in itself. It’s also difficult to know how different techniques that all start from the exact same position could be? I think you would expect a lot of similarity independent of any connections. Although that maybe beside the point …

Although we have no firm evidence for this, I would strongly suspect that Otsuka was a major influence in getting Funakoshi to include such methods in his book. I’m also sure he was an influence on the specific methods shown. What I’m not sure of is that we can claim Shindo Yoshin Ryu as the primary source of the specific methods shown due to what Funakoshi himself says, the kata being named, and the techniques matching the kata so closely.

Based on the information we have, I would suggest that Otsuka could well have been the source for including that kind of technique in the book. Having decided that it was a good idea, Funakoshi adapted methods from the kata and Otsuka played a part in that process. Otuska will no doubt have drew on his Shindo Yoshin Ryu as part of that process.

So I’m not saying that Shindo Yoshin Ryu was not a strong influence in terms of initial idea and final presentation, but I am casting doubt on it being the primary source of the specific methods themselves. It was your claim that all the techniques were directly from Shindo Yoshin Ryu (“All of the kneeling defenses that are shown in those books are based on a Koryu Bujutsu school called Shindo Yoshin Ryu techniques”), and hence that the karate kata specifically named by Funakoshi had no bearing on them, that I was questioning.

They may indeed be close to Shindo Yoshin Ryu techniques, but they are also extremely close to the kata Funakoshi names as the primary source and I don’t think we can discount that.

I think the techniques shown by Funakoshi were inspired by the fact that Shindo Yoshin Ryu (and other Japanese styles) includes kneeling methods, that Funakoshi drew from the karate kata to produce such methods (as he says he did and it would seem evident from the examples he gives that he is telling the truth about that) and that Otsuka may well have helped shape the final “kata inspired examples” that appeared in the book.

If I understand you correctly, It would seem you are of the view that all the techniques were drawn directly from Shindo Yoshin Ryu and similarities with the kata were entirely coincidental and Funakoshi justifying their place in karate? That’s a fair enough view and I can follow the logic and reasoning there.

However, to my mind, the similarities with the kata are more than strong enough for me to trust that what Funakoshi says is true. I would expect all kneeling methods to be similar, but I would not expect them all to have strong similarities with the standing techniques of kata. The strong connections with the kata would therefore lead me to have kata as the primary source of the methods shown (and Shindo Yoshin Ryu being the inspiration and an influence), as opposed to the kata Funakoshi names being entirely absent from the formative process and all similarities being falsely attributed later on. As I say, based on what I see, I see no reason to doubt what Funakoshi says is true and that the kata were the main source for what is presented.

It would seem that we essentially differ on where kata came into the process? I would suggest it was the developmental stages of those methods. If I understand you right, you are saying kata had no bearing on the methods shown, they come exclusively from Shindo Yoshin Ryu, and the named kata came in as “name only” to justify them being presented as "karate"?

It’s is the strength of the similarity with the kata that leads me to believe they must have been part of the formative process and hence reach a different conclusion to yourself. That and the fact that Funakoshi explains that to be the process. As I say, I see no reason to doubt him, and I see the nature of what is presented to be strong reasons to believe him.

Always good to have alternative views put forward so people can explore these things for themselves and make up their own minds. Thanks for this.

All the best,

Iain

OK, I'll take what appears to be the minority opinion on only part of what Gavin said (no offense, Gavin!)

Gavin J Poffley wrote:

 As far as I know seated practice like this does not exist anywhere in Chinese martial arts or in the many other sout heast Asian systems that influenced karate and is very much a Japanese cultural idea.

My response to that would be that 'sitting' paractice-- while not 'seiza' practice per se, is very common in Indo-Malay martial systems and even in footage I have seen of Ganda and Kalari-payat.   (Of course, having now made that assertion, I couldn't find a link that covered specifically "sitting" tactics. )  The closest I found was this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-BwrOwC7Yc

Its not on Youtube, but Suzanne Luna Spennoza has some great stuff out there from Maphilindo Silat (which is admittedly a modern hybrid) that works all kinds of takedowns from a seated or kneeling posture vs. a standing attacker.  There is also some 'seated vs. seated' stuff on her DVD.

My counter point would be that every culture on the planet that contains people that 'sit' in various postures (whether formally or informally) probably practices some form of self-protection against an attack from those postures.  Another example from JMA drawn from the pittance of Eishin-ryu Iaido I have studied:  one of the forms started from an attempted grab for your sword while you were in a 'lounging' position, i.e. 'seated on your hip while propped on one arm'.

So, if I understood you correctly, I would take the counter position that 'every' traditional art probably has some greater or lesser degree of 'seated' self-defense and that the exercise is not limitied to JMA.  If, however, you only meant  'seiza' when you said "like this" then I would potentially agree... as I said in my initial post, I don't believe this specific position is necessarily widespread outside of Japan but am not sure...  Perhaps you could comment on the connection to zen vs. that posture in Japanese culture as that is what I understand it's origin to be.

Much Respect,

Mike

I believe that SYR influenced the vast majority of weapons and kneeling techniques in the book (if not all). I also believe, for the most part, that Once shown the techniques by Otsuka or Kano or Ushiba or who ever, Funakoshi saw similarities and then applied them to the kata he knew.  Because of the similarities in the kneeling defenses and the SYR that I have been taught/shown, the pictures and descriptions in the book appear to be direct SYR Kata, or henka waza of those kata. There are a lot of similarities between many of the Japanese Koryu schools in one area or another, but I don't recall kneeling practice being done in Okinawan Karate. I just can't see Funakoshi taking a standing kata and then saying lets do this kneeling, but if he were shown an kneeling defense he would probably say well that fits this principle from this kata...

Matthew Matson wrote:

I just can't see Funakoshi taking a standing kata and then saying lets do this kneeling, but if he were shown an kneeling defense he would probably say well that fits this principle from this kata...

Me neither. I also don’t think he started with the kata and said let’s do this kneeling. He stated with the idea of kneeling and looked for suitable methods within the kata. Otuska may well have helped determine which methods were most suitable and hence Shindo Yoshin Ryu having a strong influence on what was finally presented. That’s an important distinction and thanks for raising that.

The key point though, and perhaps the crux of where we disagree, is that I feel the kata were a key part of the formative process (based on what Funakoshi says in the text and the methods themselves) as opposed to the kata being entirely absent from the process and Funakoshi simply presenting things directly drawn from Shindo Yoshin Ryu.

All the best,

Iain

Mike T wrote:

My counter point would be that every culture on the planet that contains people that 'sit' in various postures (whether formally or informally) probably practices some form of self-protection against an attack from those postures.

I think that’s true and many of the modern self-protection methods I have studied have culturally appropriate methods from sitting positions. As I an example, I was taught pre-emptive strikes from a sitting position (i.e. in a chair) to a standing enemy during my time with Geoff Thompson. While the formal seiza positions may have little relevance to me here in the UK, the idea of being prepared to defend ourselves from less than ideal positions would seem to be necessarily and universal.

This is one of these “what is the true tradition” things. Is it traditional to stick to the original concept of training for less than ideal situations that we may actually face? Or is it traditional to stick with methods of the past that are no longer culturally appropriate? Always a matter for the individual to decide. However, it’s perhaps worth pointing out that having methods from formal kneeling positions was part of the practice in Japanese systems for wholly pragmatic reasons.

All the best,

Iain

PS I did a quick websearch and this is one of the first things I found. Perhaps this kind of thing would be more among the lines of what would be appropriate for westerners today?

MikeT wrote:

My response to that would be that 'sitting' paractice-- while not 'seiza' practice per se, is very common in Indo-Malay martial systems and even in footage I have seen of Ganda and Kalari-payat

I was not aware of any large bodies of seated practice in south Asian martial arts like silat or bando, kalaripayit etc but from what has been said it seems that they do indeed exist (and logically have every reason to) in culturally specific forms. Come to think of it, a while back I was shown some silat techniques that I classified as crouching or squatting techniques at the time but looking at it objectively you could very easily put them in the same category as classical Japanese iai/ idori. 

It does seem that the emphasis placed on them is nowhere near that of what it is in Japanese koryu and its derivatives though. From the perspective of influence on karate I would be very interested to know if there are any Chinese examples of practice such as this.

As for the influence of zen on the seiza position I can pretty confidently say that there is not much of a link at all. The posture adopted in most zen meditation in Japan is not seiza but a cross legged one (although there are some who meditate in seiza) and the actual word for sitting cross legged is "zazen" which literally means "zen seated" or "seated for zen".  

In traditional taekwondo union we have kneeling defenses or as it is called in Korean”Anja kyorigi” (sitting defenses).

They appear late in the curriculum in the black belts training and a couple of them can be seen here: http://www.dojang.no/teori-pensum/anja-kyorugi.

We have both cross legged, kneeling (as discussed in this thread) and sitting on a chair.

Whether this form of training existed in Korea before Japans annexation in 1910 or if it is a result of Japanese influence is not certain. Seiza in Japanese is a form of formal sitting posture ingrained in native Korean culture as well, but if asked what I think then I would lean to the theory that it came into Korean martial arts as a Japanese influence and not something done in the older native arts. Taekwondo is very much influenced by Japanese karate so much so that it could probably be argued that it is a Korean style of Karate.

But to answer your question Iain: yes there are other groups beside “Karate” that does kneeling defenses and even outside JapanJI do not know if there are many organizations except for Traditional Taekwondo Union who does this but according to my teacher this form of training was very much a part of older style Taekwondo (his background Is mainly Ji Do Kwan).  And in the Kukkiwon textbook there is shown both kneeling defenses and sitting on a chair defenses.

Come to think of it, certain circles in Hapkido practise kneeling techniques as well as Taekwondo. I only know this from books so I do not know at what extent they train in kneeling defenses. So Korea has kneeling defences in their martial arts as well.

Iain Abernethy wrote:

The key point though, and perhaps the crux of where we disagree, is that I feel the kata were a key part of the formative process (based on what Funakoshi says in the text and the methods themselves) as opposed to the kata being entirely absent from the process and Funakoshi simply presenting things directly drawn from Shindo Yoshin Ryu.

Then it looks like we will leave it at, we agree to disagree. The weapons and kneeling techniques are so vastly different from everything else in Okinawan karate I don't see it coming from there. If you look at both Karate-Do Kyohan and Karate-Do Taikan it almost seems awkward to see Otsuka in there doing Jujutsu in Okinawan karate books. The concept technique and angles of what is being done, looks to me to be very different form everything else that I have seen in Okinawan karate, or even other forms of Japanese Karate, besides Wado. I'm not saying that they aren't there but it has been my experience that when other karate stylists see good Wado they always say, I'm stealing that, (nagashizuki, because they have never seen that before) or If they actually train they lean about the vast differences in movement stance posture and techniques concept starting from square one.  I have seen some stylists that say we have that but we don't teach it until after black belt or after 4th dan or something similar.... After everything else has been hardwired, so to speak. Most people don't make it that far and thus the concepts get lost.  We have 3 black belts that have recently joined our school. 2 from Shotokan, one of them from South Africa and another who trained in Japan. The 3rd was an Okinawan practitioner and also Studied Shotokan in Japan.  All 3 have their strength, but are having a difficult time making the adjustments in movement in kata in technique execution.

Every style has their own nicheand excel at least one point, and I do believe that Funakoshi and Otsuka were probably 2 of the biggest innovators in karate, in terms of including other techniques and concepts into their schools. Of course Itosu for systemizing it in a way for the masses to digest, weather good or bad it is the way the vast majority of karate schools operate today. I believe that Funakoshi added Japanese concepts to appeal to the Japanese and “sell” karate, while Otsuka added them to preserve a dying aspect of the Japanese martial culture. And you can see that in Shotokan these ideas were not actively passed down but in Wado they were.  Otsuka had a passion and understanding for the material that I believe Funakoshi lacked since Funakoshi was introduced much latter in his life. 

Here's a link that might interest you concerning Funakoshi and Draeger's observation about Funakoshi's karate taking on Tai Chi Aspects after the war: http://www.blackbeltmag.com/donn_f_draeger_the_life_and_times_of_an_american_martial_arts_pioneer/archives/681

Have a good day guys!

Mike

Hi, I have found only a few and only historical examples where shotokan fighters demonstrate defenses from seiza postion. Beside the video of Asai there is the textbook by Nishiyama which entails some self-defense from this postion.

Here is the link to the Asai-video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zhE86geeDbY&feature=related

Greetings,

Harald

Harald wrote:

Beside the video of Asai there is the textbook by Nishiyama which entails some self-defense from this position

Interesting! What is the title of that book Harald?

All the best,

Iain
PS I have embeded the video to make it easier to watch.

Just to add to Oerjan Nilsen's comments about TKD, I was living in the US (San Francisco) about 14 years ago and still studying TKD. My instructor was Korean and was one of the few that I'd had that had an organised self defence side ot his TKD teachings. I did seated defences with him - western chair not from the floor. They looked a lot like Iain's post of the JKD group. Though some were definitely oriented towards female defence, i.e. how to deal with unwanted wandering hands.

In the late 70's I trained in a combination of Karate (can't remember the style) Aikido and Kendo. The first technique in the video I recognised as "Heaven and Earth" throw - as it was described to us. Yes we did it seated for reasons already mentioned above namely it wasn't so far to fall and secondly we were told something along the lines of "If you can't get what to do with your hands right - there's no point explaining how to move your feet".

Most of the throwing techniques I learnt started from seated - when you could get that right you progressed from there.

Sorry Iain, I was offline for a while.

Here is the requested information:

Nishiyama,Hidetaka & Richard Brown. 1960. Karate. The art of empty hand fighting.: Ch.18 defense from floor sitting position, ch. 19 defense from chair sitting position.

There is also a book from Nakayama on self defense including at least the chair sitting position. I don´t have it anymore.

Other examples you find on youtube by yahara sensei or military shotokan (I´ll post the links if you don´t mind).

Have a great day,

Harald

Harald wrote:

Nishiyama,Hidetaka & Richard Brown. 1960. Karate. The art of empty hand fighting.: Ch.18 defense from floor sitting position, ch. 19 defense from chair sitting position.

There is also a book from Nakayama on self defense including at least the chair sitting position. I don´t have it anymore.

Other examples you find on youtube by yahara sensei or military shotokan (I´ll post the links if you don´t mind).

Brilliant! Thanks for that. Please do post the links to the clips you have found and I'll get them embedded.

All the best,

Iain

Only a footnote to defenses from seiza position in shotokan

Somewhere on a dvd I have demonstrations of defenses from seiza by jka fighters

one is Tanaka sensei (just two examples):

A more modern demonstration by Yahara sensei (embu 1-5, just one example)

Another one by Kawasoe sensei, just the beginning of the video, two examples:

The so-called „shotokan military karate“ includes defense from chair-position:, min. 2.

Compared to Wado idori and shindo yoshin ryu I find these examples somewhat boasting, big show, loud shouting, not realistic.

Anyway, there are examples of application of pinan(heian) godan from seiza and chair postion (one could add the analogous example from standing position) - that is perhaps not uninteresting. Unfortunately, I couldn´t find examples from the sleeping position that Iain referred to (I only could give personal anecdotes, real application against falling books on me lying in bed, I recommend kata wankan shotokan style;-)..

But in my view one has to think of self-defense techniques when you are attacked while sitting on a chair, a stool....or leaning on a bar. ...

Have a good start in the week,

Harald

P.S.: Dear Iain, feel free to delete the unnessary information in this footnote.

Hi Harald,

That’s a superb post and thank you for adding the links to all those clips (now all embedded). I totally agree with your general observation that the methods demonstrated are more for demonstration purposes than functional use. However, there are some interesting observations to be made nevertheless.

The Shotokan teachers shown in the clips are not sticking to the six examples given in Karate-Do Kyohan and would seem to be broadly following Funakoshi’s advice for kneeling defences, “once you have became proficient in these, you can apply the basic kata and kumite kata that you have already learned using your own inventiveness.”

Although these may be primarily for demonstration, the general point – which I feel is wider than kneeling defence alone – is that we should never be limited by the examples given, but that those examples are to be used as an introduction to further study and exploration.

Harald wrote:

Unfortunately, I couldn’t find examples from the sleeping position that Iain referred to

Funakoshi says of that (again, as part of the kneeling section in Karate-Do Kyohan), “It must also be interesting to give further study to adapting basic kata and kumite kata into defending and attacking in a situation where you are attacked while sleeping, however, I did not include that variable in this book.”

If you were totally asleep then you are going to get whacked before you can do anything (emphasising the importance of solid home security as part of self-protection), if you are awake / awoken then I would say it’s simply groundwork with the enemy up and you down. We see some direct examples of this in kata (i.e. Unsu). However, we should not ignore the indirect applications of kata through the application and understanding of the underlying principles. I feel Funakoshi’s encouragement to adapt the methods of kata and our kumite drills to cover kneeling and lying variables, and not just what is explicitly expressed, is important and very valid. “Principles through techniques” is also a point emphasised by many of the other past masters in their writings too.

Techniques are specific and limited; principles are universal and unlimited. Always important to get to principle level so we can be versatile and adaptable. The principle becomes intuitively understood and hence we develop good combative “habits” that ensure effectiveness regardless of specific circumstance.

All the best,

Iain

Another take on 'seated' self-defense I remembered having seen from KFM.  I don't train in this system, and I'm still not sure what I think about it-- sometimes it seems to be very effective, and some things I have seen seem to degenerate into 'movie martial arts'.   But as to the point of the original thread, based on the clips I have seen of it, the seated defenseives seem to incorporate the same basic motions or 'forms' as standing, with no specialized distinction.  It is therefore simply 'what to do when in a common posture',

No, as a Karate-Aikidoka I can't leave this thread without Aikido anylonger. Here is a video from the Aikikai style, a Demonstration by Moriteru Ueshiba, the  grandson of the Founder of Aikido:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=94sOPZ4WtyY

At 5:12 he starts with sitting against standing (hanmi handachi waza) and at 5:45 he continues with sitting against sitting (suwari waza). And no, I don't think this can be used for self defence :) However, I think some interesting points can be made:

- Moriteru has trained intensivly Suwari waza, the transitions between the techniques are very fluent and he moves really good on his kees.

- In Aikido the techniques for sitting and standing are almost the same and the same principles are used.

- The defence against the shoulder grap starts in the same way as in Iaian's Pinan-bukais, the partner ist unballanced by an „attack“ to his ellbow joint (see 5:55). The same princile is used when standing. However, it's often done a very soft way.

- Moriteru doesn't wait for the attack to finish before moving, but moves early or even presses his partner. The same is done while standing.

- It's a demonstration of Aikido, not a show. What I mean is that this way Aikido is praticed in this style.

And here is a second Video from „Daito Ryu Aikijujutsu“ - the main source of Aikido as far a I know:

 

I hope you like the videos.

miket wrote:

Another take on 'seated' self-defense I remembered having seen from KFM.

Thanks for that Mike. Interesting to get a “modern take” on things, and yet one in which we can see commonality in approach with some of what has gone before i.e. the core concepts can be applied regardless of position.

Christianla wrote:

as a Karate-Aikidoka I can't leave this thread without Aikido any longer.

Interesting post! Nice videos too … and I think you’re right that the arrival of Aikido was well overdue :-) I’ve embedded the second one, but was unable to do so with the first.

Many thanks!

Iain