# Training at the Source



## Dudi Nisan (Dec 31, 2016)

How important it is for the serious karate to train in Okinawa? How important it is to train there for an extended period?

What do you think guys?

Happy New Year!


----------



## drop bear (Dec 31, 2016)

Honestly I think it would be really beneficial for a lot of martial arts and non martial arts reasons.


----------



## Kickboxer101 (Jan 1, 2017)

Not at all really to be honest as long as your own teacher knows what he's talking about


----------



## KangTsai (Jan 1, 2017)

Depends on how good the teacher/s is/are. Who knows, your current teacher could be miles better, or behind. Your choice.


----------



## drop bear (Jan 1, 2017)

Don't settle for mediocre. Make the bloody trip.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 1, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> How important it is for the serious karate to train in Okinawa? How important it is to train there for an extended period?
> 
> What do you think guys?
> 
> Happy New Year!



I lived in Okinawa for a year in 1982-83.  Fun place.  I was a US Marine, and was not training in MA at the time.  I think Okinawa is worth a trip from the point of view of historical and cultural investigation.

As to martial arts training, I do not think it is necessary - as others said - assuming one's instruction is up to par.

If you go there to train, I think a lot depends on what it is you believe you need to accomplish there.

Are you going with a group, or by yourself?  In either case, is it a planned trip, or are you just figuring to drop in and be made welcome?

_"Extended period"_ makes me think of deshi-type training.  I understand that such arrangements can be made.  I'm not sure how useful it is, but every situation is different of course.

I would definitely recommend a short visit before making any kind of long term arrangements.


----------



## Buka (Jan 1, 2017)

Depends on a lot of things. "Serious" for one. Serious how? More importantly, serious how long? If you're a serious student but have been training just a couple years, I think you're better off going to Disney on vacation. (not trying be a wise guys, here)

And where in Okinawa? Is it the dojo of your teacher's teacher, or one your organizations historic places? Will you be welcome with open arms? Staying long? Do you have arrangements and money?

If you want to go just for the heck of it, I say go for it and have a ball. Any other reason might take more looking into, and lots of planning.


----------



## Paul_D (Jan 1, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> How important it is for the serious karate to train in Okinawa? How important it is to train there for an extended period?


As important as it would be to go to France to learn ballet (I.e. Not at all).


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 1, 2017)

drop bear said:


> Honestly I think it would be really beneficial for a lot of martial arts and non martial arts reasons.


Maybe you can say more about those reasons?



Bill Mattocks said:


> If you go there to train, I think a lot depends on what it is you believe you need to accomplish there.



What can you accomplish in Okinawa that you cannot in the West?



Buka said:


> Will you be welcome with open arms?



You mean that Okinawan masters do not usually accept students with open arms? Is it difficult to start training there?


----------



## Buka (Jan 1, 2017)

Dudi, do you train now? Does your school have an association/relationship with a school in Okinawa? 
Do you have a particular one in mind?


----------



## drop bear (Jan 1, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> Maybe you can say more about those reasons?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There is a difference between slugging your butt down to the local gym and making the commitment to training in the culture and country of your chosen style. 

So you will train with better guys.
You will need to be in top form yourself.
You will have a legitimate goal to focus on. 
You will get to see a new culture and country.
You will have done something pretty cool. 
You will be training 24/7

Same reason people do thai camps in thailand.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 1, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> Maybe you can say more about those reasons?



I can try.  I will probably step on some toes, but I don't intend to.

Some people go to Okinawa so that they can 'pad their resume' and be able to claim they have trained with various [insert name] famous masters.
Some people go to Okinawa thinking they will be promoted.
Some people go to Okinawa for the history and the culture.
Some people go to Okinawa to earnestly train with masters of their particular style of Okinawan karate.
There are other reasons as well.



> What can you accomplish in Okinawa that you cannot in the West?



It's a good question.  I don't know the answer to that.  For me, there is nothing in Okinawa that I do not have here in the USA, training right in the dojo I am fortunate enough to be training at.  Perhaps for some styles, if their honbu is in Okinawa, training there at times is important or mandatory.  I cannot speak for those people.



> You mean that Okinawan masters do not usually accept students with open arms? Is it difficult to start training there?



I mean Okinawans are just like people everywhere.  You cannot say they are all one way or all another way.  They are individuals. 

There are masters who are quite willing to accept visitors from outside Japan and Okinawa.  Some because they have a strong desire to pass on their knowledge and wisdom.  Some would like to be paid.  I mean no disrespect to any who ask for payment in exchange for training, and I am not trying to infer that it is wrong to require payment for services; I am saying only that there are some few who are in it for the money, just as is the case everywhere.  In other words, they live in a fairly poor part of the world.  If foreigners want to show up unannounced, but bearing large bundles of cash, and they want a couple-hour seminar and a new promotion, who are they to argue?

I would also say that there is a common perception that quite often, foreign students (especially Americans) show up unannounced and expect doors to open for them.  Why would they think this?  They are not God's gift to Okinawa or Karate.  Some visits are tours arranged well in advance, those are usually quite well received.  Some are more private affairs of a few select students.  Some are huge ensemble groups of various disciplines who get the meet-n-greet with various masters, pay their respects, do a little kata, and get a promotion.

Now these are all 'visits' I am referring to.  In order to train for any length of time in Okinawa, you have to have permission to stay for that long.  You'll need a pile of money, and you'll have to able to learn to get around, speak some Japanese (not much required), and be able to train in the jungle heat and humidity (many Okinawans see air conditioning as something to use in extreme heat, but very sparingly, not like Americans).  

I guess my question to you is what do YOU expect to get out of a visit to Okinawa? What is it you think Okinawa can offer you that you cannot receive where you train now?

This is a pretty good guide:

The Ultimate Guide to Training Karate in Okinawa - The Birthplace of Karate

Frankly, I don't have any reason to train in Okinawa.  It is where my style of karate began, but my Sensei trained under two of the best 'First Generation' American students of the Soke of our style, and the Soke has long passed away.  There would be no one for me to visit in my own style of karate.


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 2, 2017)

Hi guys, thank you for your input!



Hi Bill, thanks for your detailed answer.



I began martial arts training with Shotokan.

However, since I came to Taiwan, 15 years ago, I have done only _gongfu_. Last year a publisher asked me to do research on the Chinese origins of the Bubishi, which I accepted, and then I saw this school:








Quite impressive, in my opinion. So, I started thinking about Okinawa.



When it comes to_ gongfu_ then (generally speaking) Chinese masters know much more then Western teachers. Even the average Chinese practitioner knows more about _gongfu_ than foreign practitioners/teachers. And this “knowing” affects practice.



I thought the same would be true for Okinawan masters, that, generally speaking, they’d know much more about karate than Westerners, and that their knowledge would positively affect their practice.



This guy from Shorin ryu, for example, has very strong “spiritual” aura (if I am not imagining things), and this, I think, has to do with certain knowledge, knowledge which informs his practice.



What do you think?


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 2, 2017)

Buka said:


> . "Serious" for one. Serious how?



I think this is a fundamental question!

I think that by "serious" I meant that martial arts is more than a hobby for you. It's not your job--you don't making a living out of it--but it is a high priority. And you really want to understand it; you want to go all the way, you are willing to go all the way. By that I mean that you learn not only the forms/kata and their applications, but everything else about you art--its history, the culture that gave birth to it and nourished it, the motivation of its creators, their ideals, their dreams, their struggles, everything. 

I guess that is what I mean by "all the way"; that's what I mean by "serious".

What do you think guys?


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 2, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> When it comes to_ gongfu_ then (generally speaking) Chinese masters know much more then Western teachers. Even the average Chinese practitioner knows more about _gongfu_ than foreign practitioners/teachers. And this “knowing” affects practice.
> 
> I thought the same would be true for Okinawan masters, that, generally speaking, they’d know much more about karate than Westerners, and that their knowledge would positively affect their practice.
> 
> ...



I think I cannot answer the question about whether or not Okinawan masters know more than American masters with regard to the various Okinawan styles of karate.

I think there are too many variables, too few hard-and-fast rules.  Even if one says 'generally', one is likely to be wrong no matter what one says.

I will say this - it seems to me that the more generations one gets from the source of style in question, the more changes are introduced.  Some intentionally, some without anyone actually trying to change anything.  It just happens.  It seems to be a natural occurrence.  Students practicing a style that is ten generations away from the founder's original training will look visibly different as they practice than their predecessors did.

One could argue that American students (or any students outside of Okinawa) would be more likely to experience this shift, and would benefit from being exposed to a closer-to-the-original rendition of the art.

The question would be whether the Okinawan masters now teaching have also experienced this drift, and if so, how much compared to the foreign students?

I don't think it can be answered even in a general sense.  It's strictly case-by-case, I think.

In my case (and speaking only for myself of course), there are no Okinawan masters in my style who are currently teaching and closer in terms of generation to the founder as my own instructor is.  Pure luck on my part - I am learning from a man who learned from two masters who were the founder's original American students.  My Sensei is well-known and well-regarded throughout the world in our particular style; he is respected.  He has trained with other first-generation students of our art and they find no fault with his training.  The organization I belong to has no Okinawan headquarters, our Honbu is in the USA.

For others, this may not be the case.  Perhaps they train from a 10th or 15th generation student of their founder and there are masters to be found in Okinawa who teach something significantly different than they do, or are closer to the founder in terms of generations of instruction.  I don't know.  I don't know if such students would gain from being taught something radically different than what they are currently learning.  Perhaps the changes are not radical, but subtle.  Perhaps the training is the same, but there are insights to be gained that were not passed along on the foreign side.  It's impossible to know.

I would love to go back to Okinawa for a visit.  However, probably not for training.  There is nothing there for me in that sense.  And I am OK with that.


----------



## Buka (Jan 2, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> I think this is a fundamental question!
> 
> I think that by "serious" I meant that martial arts is more than a hobby for you. It's not your job--you don't making a living out of it--but it is a high priority. And you really want to understand it; you want to go all the way, you are willing to go all the way. By that I mean that you learn not only the forms/kata and their applications, but everything else about you art--its history, the culture that gave birth to it and nourished it, the motivation of its creators, their ideals, their dreams, their struggles, everything.
> 
> ...



I think you would have a wonderful time in Okinawa. Go have fun, bro. Just make all arrangements first.


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 2, 2017)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I think there are too many variables, too few hard-and-fast rules. Even if one says 'generally', one is likely to be wrong no matter what one says.



Bill demands precision and I appreciate that! You are right. I should be more precise.

I will limit the discussion to my own experience. I trained with people who spent several years either in Japan or in Taiwan. They had good technical knowledge of their arts, but not much more than that. If I asked about the culture, the history, the meaning of this Eastern concept or that, they'd have very little to say.

Since then I have spoken to and interviewed masters from China, HK and Taiwan.  I could ask them any question I wanted, and I could keep asking them, and they would simply keep answering me. They have such an amazing knowledge that talking to them is a humbling experience (and I've been studying and researching this field for 20 years).

And for an anecdote: after about 5 years of gongfu practice here( at that point I had already had a degree in East Asian studies, had  3 more years of intense language school and was doing my masters in Chinese history) there comes a new, young Taiwanese guy to our class. And he starts a conversation with my teacher, and I am just standing there, listening, and I realize that there are so many things that I still don't know, but which that young guy, who did not even train with us, already knows.

I encountered similar situations many times. that is what I meant when I said that even the average person knows more.



Buka said:


> I think you would have a wonderful time in Okinawa. Go have fun, bro. Just make all arrangements first.



Thanks man! It's very kind of you!


----------



## Buka (Jan 2, 2017)

And take pictures, Dudi, lots of pictures.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 2, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> Bill demands precision and I appreciate that! You are right. I should be more precise.
> 
> I will limit the discussion to my own experience. I trained with people who spent several years either in Japan or in Taiwan. They had good technical knowledge of their arts, but not much more than that. If I asked about the culture, the history, the meaning of this Eastern concept or that, they'd have very little to say.
> 
> ...


I suppose a lot comes down to your purpose in studying a given martial art. If you are doing it for insight into the culture and philosophies of a particular country, then an instructor who is a native of that country will probably have more to offer you. If you are doing it for the sake of the martial skills and knowledge embodied in that art, then there may not be a difference.

I would be cautious about uncritically accepting the history related by an instructor, even if they are a native of the country in question. Most martial artists are not historians. It is very common for martial arts instructors to relate detailed histories of their art which are heaping piles of donkey dung even if (sometimes especially if) they are natives of the country where the art originated.

I don't know much about the state of CMA instruction in one country vs another. I do know that for many arts from around the globe some of the best instructors are now located in the U.S., just because those practitioners moved here for better economic prospects than they had back home.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 2, 2017)

Tony Dismukes said:


> I suppose a lot comes down to your purpose in studying a given martial art. If you are doing it for insight into the culture and philosophies of a particular country, then an instructor who is a native of that country will probably have more to offer you. If you are doing it for the sake of the martial skills and knowledge embodied in that art, then there may not be a difference.
> 
> I would be cautious about uncritically accepting the history related by an instructor, even if they are a native of the country in question. Most martial artists are not historians. It is very common for martial arts instructors to relate detailed histories of their art which are heaping piles of donkey dung even if (sometimes especially if) they are natives of the country where the art originated.
> 
> I don't know much about the state of CMA instruction in one country vs another. I do know that for many arts from around the globe some of the best instructors are now located in the U.S., just because those practitioners moved here for better economic prospects than they had back home.


And with those arts that have created generations of instructors in the US, some of the best instructors may well have developed here, too. There's nothing magical about countries of origin. In some arts (I'd suspect BJJ is one), there's a strong influence of the founder(s) still to be found at the country of origin. In other arts (like NGA), there's actually less to be found in the source country.


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jan 2, 2017)

Consider, the people training you just happen to live in Okinawa, and are not granted with any special teaching abilities, you could get at home, but it would be a good time.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 2, 2017)

Touch Of Death said:


> Consider, the people training you just happen to live in Okinawa, and are not granted with any special teaching abilities, you could get at home, but it would be a good time.


That's the thing to me. I'd love to go train some in Japan. While NGA is no longer found there, I'd be happy to train in something related, and the experience of training there in a different environment, under a different culture, would be worth the trip.


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 2, 2017)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I will say this - it seems to me that the more generations one gets from the source of style in question, the more changes are introduced. Some intentionally, some without anyone actually trying to change anything. It just happens. It seems to be a natural occurrence



This is very accurate. Martial traditions, as all other traditions, continually and constantly change. As for unintentional changes, well, this is beyond our control. But what about intentional changes? The question here is who has the authority to interpret, or re-interpret tradition?

I think that we in the West have all been affected, to a lesser or greater degree, by what I call Zen missionaries. Those people argued that Zen can be transmitted without words(=language) because it was from the start "special transmission outside the scriptures(=words)". While this might be true in a limited sense(when, as Bill says, one is taught by The Source, so to speak, this might hold true)  it is mainly Zen ideology, not to say propaganda.

For Zen monks themselves have been interpreting and reinterpreting their tradition for 1200 years now. that is why there are so many Zen commentaries(the amount written by Zen monks is truly unbelievable). And this re-interpretation, expressed in words, and relying to a large degree on a WRITTEN canon, affects practice. And to a very large degree.

So what gave those monks the authority of re-interpretation? 1) experience with practice. 2) direct relationship with A Source. 3) Access to the literary tradition(access to this tradition is mainly a function of one's language skills and specific sort of education).  

Now, this is not a camouflaged criticism. I am not trying to belittle Western teachers. However, if we consider the prerequisites for re-interpretation we mostly find that they lack the third component--access to the literary tradition.

Let me emphasize, I do not mean to say that what Western teachers teach and transmit is merely a watered-down version of what is being transmitted in the East. Not at all. I just point out the fact that without access to the East Asian literary tradition Western martial artists are not completely independent.  



Tony Dismukes said:


> I would be cautious about uncritically accepting the history related by an instructor, even if they are a native of the country in question.



You are right to be cautious. However, from my experience, these masters, even living in some remote village in China and not very well educated are very sensitive to what we now call "objective historical accounts". I was very surprised by this. So, for example, they'll tell you, "see, this is the story of origins transmitted in our village. But that's just a myth". I found out, however, that sometimes they were too quick in dismissing those origin stories, because those stories did transmit historical facts, and more importantly, historical truths.


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 2, 2017)

Buka said:


> And take pictures, Dudi, lots of pictures.



Thanks again man! You are right. These adventures should be documented. I made the mistake of not documenting my earlier days of training. In fact, I took almost no pictures and I regret it. It was stupid. I am definitely going to heed your advice.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> This is very accurate. Martial traditions, as all other traditions, continually and constantly change. As for unintentional changes, well, this is beyond our control. But what about intentional changes? The question here is who has the authority to interpret, or re-interpret tradition?
> 
> I think that we in the West have all been affected, to a lesser or greater degree, by what I call Zen missionaries. Those people argued that Zen can be transmitted without words(=language) because it was from the start "special transmission outside the scriptures(=words)". While this might be true in a limited sense(when, as Bill says, one is taught by The Source, so to speak, this might hold true)  it is mainly Zen ideology, not to say propaganda.
> 
> ...


I'd argue against both the second and third "requirements" you list. 

For something like martial arts, having access to a literary source is not nearly as important as experience with effective training. And since most of what has been written on most martial arts is available in English (regardless of the original source language), that literary access is more universal than it was, as least as far as the more modern writings (which I argue are often more important).

The requirement of access to a source once again assumes the source is better than the subsequent generations. For the first few generations of students, this is likely to be true, since the source is still developing the material and principles, so the explanations won't be as complete. Thus, those students are left to fill in many gaps with their own understanding. After the first few generations of students produce instructors, however, the situation changes. Some of those will have found better explanations. Some will have understood pieces even better than the source did. Some will have become better technicians than the source. Over time, the source becomes one important voice among many, and some of the "many" will be found in far away places these days.


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> And since most of what has been written on most martial arts is available in English



I am sorry. But that is incorrect. Only very little has been translated into English, and as you know, much is lost in translation.



gpseymour said:


> assumes the source is better than the subsequent generations



You mix up "fighting" and "tradition". When it comes to tradition then the Source is by definition the most important. Martial arts are traditions. Effective fighting you have in the military (maybe...).


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> I am sorry. But that is incorrect. Only very little has been translated into English, and as you know, much is lost in translation.


Most of what has been written on nearly any art (assuming it is extant) was written in the last 100 years. That's true of almost any topic.



> You mix up "fighting" and "tradition". When it comes to tradition then the Source is by definition the most important. Martial arts are traditions. Effective fighting you have in the military (maybe...).



No, actually I don't mix those up. I think you place too much emphasis on the tradition. Okay, too much for my taste, but not for others. There's really nothing wrong with wanting to dig deeply into the tradition, though it has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the art. It's important if you want to understand the thoughts of the founder(s), because their culture affects how they communicate. But it has nothing to do with the mechanics of the art. How important tradition is depends upon your approach and focus. Tradition, to me, only matters insofar as it ties together the community of an art. So, I maintain some traditions from mainline NGA, though they have no real effect upon the mechanics and effectiveness of the art.


----------



## Tony Dismukes (Jan 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> In some arts (I'd suspect BJJ is one), there's a strong influence of the founder(s) still to be found at the country of origin.


If you look at the list of winners of the Mundials (World Jiu-Jitsu Championships) the majority of the names are still Brazilian. _However_, at least half of those Brazilian-born practitioners live and teach in the U.S.. In addition, most of the prominent Gracie family practitioners live in the U.S. (except for Roger Gracie, who lives in England and Carlos Jr, who lives in Brazil). This leads me to suspect that we've reached the point where the level of training in the U.S. is at or near the level of training available in Brazil.

That said, I'd still love to make a training trip to Brazil one of these days. I'm even studying Portuguese, so hopefully I would have learned enough to carry on conversations by the time such a trip comes about.


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> Most of what has been written on nearly any art (assuming it is extant) was written in the last 100 years. That's true of almost any topic.



We have 400 years of martial arts literature in both China and Japan. The amount of this literature is beyond huge.  



gpseymour said:


> it has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the art



It has everything to do with the effectiveness of the art.



gpseymour said:


> it has nothing to do with the mechanics of the art



And it definitely has to do with the mechanics of the art.

The ancients moved, and opted to move, quite differently. The writings of the ancients help much in this respect. They often speak of "chain of movements", what to move first, what to move second etc. And, East Asian SEE the Chinese characters/kanji, while we, Westerners read them. Many character-combinations in the ancient writings are evocative--they evoke in the one SEEing them a certain movement, or physical gesture. This is just all over the classical texts. And, this is one point that is totally lost in translation.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2017)

Tony Dismukes said:


> If you look at the list of winners of the Mundials (World Jiu-Jitsu Championships) the majority of the names are still Brazilian. _However_, at least half of those Brazilian-born practitioners live and teach in the U.S.. In addition, most of the prominent Gracie family practitioners live in the U.S. (except for Roger Gracie, who lives in England and Carlos Jr, who lives in Brazil). This leads me to suspect that we've reached the point where the level of training in the U.S. is at or near the level of training available in Brazil.
> 
> That said, I'd still love to make a training trip to Brazil one of these days. I'm even studying Portuguese, so hopefully I would have learned enough to carry on conversations by the time such a trip comes about.


That was quick - I guess globalization has sped up that process, too. I'd still guess (and it's nothing more than a guess) that there's a dense pocket near the origin in Brazil that's not found in the US. Although with so many Gracies here, that may not be true, either.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> We have 400 years of martial arts literature in both China and Japan. The amount of this literature is beyond huge.


More has been written on Karate, for instance, in the last 100 years than in that time. And much of that has been published (including analysis of some of those ancient writings). My assertion is that there is likely not a huge amount of physical knowledge to be found in the older writings that will not be found in a different form in the newer writings. And the older writings include inaccuracies driven by misunderstandings of how the world works (like ki/chi metaphysical explanations).




> It has everything to do with the effectiveness of the art.
> 
> And it definitely has to do with the mechanics of the art.
> 
> The ancients moved, and opted to move, quite differently. The writings of the ancients help much in this respect. They often speak of "chain of movements", what to move first, what to move second etc. And, East Asian SEE the Chinese characters/kanji, while we, Westerners read them. Many character-combinations in the ancient writings are evocative--they evoke in the one SEEing them a certain movement, or physical gesture. This is just all over the classical texts. And, this is one point that is totally lost in translation.


They were using the same bodies we use, and the same mechanics we have available. And their movements were not fed by the scientific understandings of advancements in things like kinesiology. The ancients made choices based upon what was available at the time. Their culture drove how they got to their point, but culture absolutely does not change the mechanics of the human body (beyond flexibility in certain areas due to habitual actions). The cultures of Okinawa and Japan are in no way necessary to the effectiveness of Karate-do and Judo. The mechanics work the same if you ignore those. There are reasons to study the cultures and those links, but physical effectiveness is not among them.


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 3, 2017)

Tony Dismukes said:


> This leads me to suspect that we've reached the point where the level of training in the U.S. is at or near the level of training available in Brazil.



I am sure you are right. My arguments are applicable only to East Asian martial arts. BJJ is something else. I am not arguing against its effectiveness, just saying that it is not an East Asian art. BJJ comes from Judo, which was already removed, almost disconnected, from the East Asian literary tradition. Jigoro  Kano simply did not think much about classical Jujutsu theories, which he found vague and mystical. BJJ is even more removed from the East Asia tradition  than Judo. BJJ is simply a different phenomenon.  

Gpseymour's Aikido is closer than Judo to the classical traditions of East Asia. But in the case of both Judo and Aikido, effectiveness, in the modern scientific sense of the word, is more important than being effective in the way the ancients were. I am not saying it's bad, just pointing out the differences. If you one knows what he is doing, and BJJ practitioners seem like they are (Aikidoka, I feel, are less certain about their orientation)  than it's fine.


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> They were using the same bodies we use, and the same mechanics we have available



I think that this, for example, is a different way of moving:


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> I think that this, for example, is a different way of moving:


I cover these same types of topics, with no reference to the ancients. It's body mechanics. That instructor shows a different approach to them, but that's just a different way of applying the same principles.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 3, 2017)

I think the OP has made up his mind and is looking for confirmation.  If you want to go, go.  Have fun.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2017)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I think the OP has made up his mind and is looking for confirmation.  If you want to go, go.  Have fun.


Agreed. The trip is worthwhile on its own merit.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 3, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> How important it is for the serious karate to train in Okinawa? How important it is to train there for an extended period?
> 
> What do you think guys?
> 
> Happy New Year!



Depends entirely on what you want to get out of your training.  Information is now so widespread and available there is not likely anything you can get in terms of practical skills that is not available in many other places.

Of course most people that get really into karate have more to their interest then purely practical things.  It's like any other skill that has roots in a specific culture.  You don't need to go to Italy to learn how to make spaghetti.  But, there are a lot of cultural things around spaghetti that you might find beneficial that can only be gained by going to Italy.  It might not help you make better spaghetti, but it can enhance your spaghetti experience.


----------



## O'Malley (Jan 3, 2017)

Andrew Green said:


> Depends entirely on what you want to get out of your training.  Information is now so widespread and available there is not likely anything you can get in terms of practical skills that is not available in many other places.
> 
> Of course most people that get really into karate have more to their interest then purely practical things.  It's like any other skill that has roots in a specific culture.  You don't need to go to Italy to learn how to make spaghetti.  But, there are a lot of cultural things around spaghetti that you might find beneficial that can only be gained by going to Italy.  It might not help you make better spaghetti, but it can enhance your spaghetti experience.



As an Italian I can safely say that decent spaghetti is hard to find outside of Italy, except in places where Italian immigration is strong. But again we're damn picky about food.

The most extreme example of needing to go to the source for the real deal is that the granita you can find outside of Sicily (even on mainland Italy) is not even worthy to be given that name.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 3, 2017)

O'Malley said:


> The most extreme example of needing to go to the source for the real deal is that the granita you can find outside of Sicily (even on mainland Italy) is not even worthy to be given that name.



Ah I dream of granita with Inspector Montalbano, sigh.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 3, 2017)

O'Malley said:


> As an Italian I can safely say that decent spaghetti is hard to find outside of Italy, except in places where Italian immigration is strong. But again we're damn picky about food.
> 
> The most extreme example of needing to go to the source for the real deal is that the granita you can find outside of Sicily (even on mainland Italy) is not even worthy to be given that name.



Explain to me where in Okinawa I would obtain training in my Okinawan karate style (Isshin Ryu) which is better than the training I already receive.  Something I would get which I cannot get from my Sensei.

There is none.

This is why I reject such arguments.

With regard to the OP, it is clear he never intended to entertain any discussion about going versus not going.  He believes he will receive great benefit.  In such cases, he should do as he pleases.  If he wants opinions, he now has them.  But he didn't really want opinions, it seems to me.  He wanted affirmation.


----------



## O'Malley (Jan 3, 2017)

I have no intention on explaining that to you, I think that you're in a better position to value how going to Okinawa would improve your learning or not. If your current Sensei gives you better training than anyone in Okinawa then more power to you.

For my personal situation: I train aikido under a Godan (Aikikai) in Belgium. I could train with a much higher ranked teacher (like 7-8th dan) if I went to the Hombu Dojo in Japan (the source). I could also go to the much closer Paris to train under Christian Tissier (8th dan) which is one of the most respected teachers in the world. I wouldn't need to "go to the source".

It might be beneficial to me and I might travel to Japan in the future to expand my knowledge, just to see (and hopefully feel) what the top guys in aikido can do. But for now I'm in no rush: I'm still a beginner and I have so much to learn from my current teacher who's great.

My previous comment was about pasta (and I confirm said comment).


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 3, 2017)

Bill Mattocks said:


> With regard to the OP, it is clear he never intended to entertain any discussion about going versus not going.



Maybe I just think differently than you?



Bill Mattocks said:


> . He believes he will receive great benefit. In such cases, he should do as he pleases. If he wants opinions, he now has them. But he didn't really want opinions, it seems to me. He wanted affirmation.



Actually, very little of the discussion was about actually training in Okinawa. Among the discussants you are the only one who lived/trained there. Actually, there was very little on how Okinawan masters differ, than, say, American masters.


----------



## oaktree (Jan 3, 2017)

I personally do not think you need to train at the source persay, if you are getting what you need and your teacher is partaking in giving you authentic instructions.
I think training at the source when you can not even grasp kihon basics doesn't seem worth the trouble. However, if you have a good grasp and want to dive deeper in the meaning of said art then training at the source may widen your understanding.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 3, 2017)

Dudi Nisan said:


> Maybe I just think differently than you?



Everyone is permitted to think any way they wish.  However, when one asks 'should I stay or should I go' and then presents every 'stay' comment with a counterpoint indicating that 'go' is what they intend to do, then one came to the discussion with an agenda in mind.  Recognizing this, I refuse to play your little game any longer.



> Actually, very little of the discussion was about actually training in Okinawa. Among the discussants you are the only one who lived/trained there. Actually, there was very little on how Okinawan masters differ, than, say, American masters.



I suspect that the fact that I lived there for a year has influenced me to the extent that the romance does not exist.  It's a small island.  Hot, humid, and very smelly.  However, it is the birthplace of modern-day karate.  Go if you wish to go.  Just don't ask opinions if you have already made up your mind; that's not nice.


----------



## Dudi Nisan (Jan 3, 2017)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Just don't ask opinions if you have already made up your mind; that's not nice.



I am sorry you see it that way. I truly am.

I was speaking of my experience in the Chinese world. And my opinion is that average level of gongfu in the East is higher and that Eastern masters know much more than their Western counterparts. If someone asked me whether to come to the East to learn _gongfu_ I would point out these advantages.

And I say again, there was not much comparison between Okinawa-West in the above discussion. And I am sorry to hear that your one year in Okinawa killed the romance. I would like to know, however, whether others have been there and fallen in love with it.



oaktree said:


> I personally do not think you need to train at the source persay, if you are getting what you need and your teacher is partaking in giving you authentic instructions.
> I think training at the source when you can not even grasp kihon basics doesn't seem worth the trouble. However, if you have a good grasp and want to dive deeper in the meaning of said art then training at the source may widen your understanding.



Thanks man, this is a good advice!
.


----------



## kuniggety (Jan 3, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> That was quick - I guess globalization has sped up that process, too. I'd still guess (and it's nothing more than a guess) that there's a dense pocket near the origin in Brazil that's not found in the US. Although with so many Gracies here, that may not be true, either.



It was in the 90s that there seemed to be a mass migration of the BJJ masters to the US - most likely for monetary/way of life reasons. They've all raised black belts who are raising their own black belts which have helped with the spread. California and Hawaii are especially FULL of BJJ schools but it's definitely found about everywhere now.

As for the OP, having lived in Okinawa from 2005 - 2009, I would whole-heartedly recommend a trip. It's a beautiful place with an even more beautiful people. For whatever reason, I didn't study karate when I was there (kick myself now). I did aikido a little bit. The training bit didn't feel any different than if I was doing the training somewhere in the US. That aside, I really loved Okinawa, and would move back without much hesitation.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 3, 2017)

Train at the source -- or train with a solid connection to the source?

Can you rely on better training if you travel?  Or will you be one of a ton of foreigners squeezed into a training hall relying on someone to translate who'd rather be training themselves?   

I don't think you necessarily have to go to the nation/place of origin to get the best training.  Often, travelers end up in "visiting classes" where they don't get the training they believe they're getting because the locals are busy trying to get their own training in, or they're all going to the home training hall to attend the most senior instructor -- and they aren't really ready for those lessons yet.  They'd do better spending the time with other instructors who can give them focused attention that will make them ready for the "big lesson."  

But they do need a connection to the top teachers and the source material.  As Bill noted, move a step or two away, and the lessons get blurred or lost.  I've seen this in my own art.  I'm fortunate enough to train under a first generation student of the man who introduced our art to the US -- and through that connection (especially) to have had training time with the grandmaster himself.  Not just a class for 100 plus -- but specific personal training and correction.  We have that solid connection to the source.  For one koryu art (sorry; I forget which), the head of the style is now in the US, and the art isn't being taught in Japan any more, if I recall correctly.  For BJJ -- lots of top instructors have relocated or at least colocated to the US. 

So... you need to train under people who maintain connections to the highest level of the art -- which may or may not require overseas travel.

But... if you have the opportunity -- why not go?  Feel the culture, experience the people, train in what becomes avaibaablether.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2017)

O'Malley said:


> I have no intention on explaining that to you, I think that you're in a better position to value how going to Okinawa would improve your learning or not. If your current Sensei gives you better training than anyone in Okinawa then more power to you.
> 
> For my personal situation: I train aikido under a Godan (Aikikai) in Belgium. I could train with a much higher ranked teacher (like 7-8th dan) if I went to the Hombu Dojo in Japan (the source). I could also go to the much closer Paris to train under Christian Tissier (8th dan) which is one of the most respected teachers in the world. I wouldn't need to "go to the source".
> 
> ...


And I would argue that Tissier Sensei may be a better choice, since he's more likely to understand the culture you live in and practice the art in.


----------



## Andrew Green (Jan 3, 2017)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Explain to me where in Okinawa I would obtain training in my Okinawan karate style (Isshin Ryu) which is better than the training I already receive.  Something I would get which I cannot get from my Sensei.
> 
> There is none.



I suspect trips like this aren't real about the training, as much as the experience.  You want to go and visit Shimabuku's village?  Train on a beach in the Pacific?  People don't go to Italy just to learn how to make pasta, people don't go to Jerusalem just to read the bible, people don't go to Okinawa just to learn how to do a kata and people don't go to Vegas just to play cards.  

Maybe those things matter to you, maybe not.  from a purely functional perspective going all that way likely makes no sense.  But if the experience is something that you place value on go for it.  Lots of people do, and in many different styles.  For some people the experience and the immersion alone will make a improvement in your training.  

Going to Vatican city is not going to make anyone a better Catholic, they have the same knowledge everywhere.  But I suspect if you interview visitors a lot will tell you it was a life changing experience.   People even travelled to go see a grilled cheese sandwich that looked like the Virgin Mary, and someone bought that thing for $28.000... probably didn't even taste very good by the time it was sold.

Anyways, guess my answer is the trip is worth it if it's worth it to the person.  And that is going to depend entirely on that person and what they value.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 3, 2017)

Andrew Green said:


> I suspect trips like this aren't real about the training, as much as the experience.  You want to go and visit Shimabuku's village?  Train on a beach in the Pacific?  People don't go to Italy just to learn how to make pasta, people don't go to Jerusalem just to read the bible, people don't go to Okinawa just to learn how to do a kata and people don't go to Vegas just to play cards.
> 
> Maybe those things matter to you, maybe not.  from a purely functional perspective going all that way likely makes no sense.  But if the experience is something that you place value on go for it.  Lots of people do, and in many different styles.  For some people the experience and the immersion alone will make a improvement in your training.
> 
> ...


Agreed. I'd love to make a trip to Hokkaido, even though NGA no longer exists there. I might even be able to dig up enough information to find the area where the original dojo was, though I doubt I could do more than stand nearby and enjoy the feeling of being near where it started.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 4, 2017)

Andrew Green said:


> people don't go to Jerusalem just to read the bible



Sometimes they end up in a mental hospital...Jerusalem Syndrome is a very real mental health issue.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 4, 2017)

Andrew Green said:


> I suspect trips like this aren't real about the training, as much as the experience.  You want to go and visit Shimabuku's village?  Train on a beach in the Pacific?  People don't go to Italy just to learn how to make pasta, people don't go to Jerusalem just to read the bible, people don't go to Okinawa just to learn how to do a kata and people don't go to Vegas just to play cards.
> 
> Maybe those things matter to you, maybe not.  from a purely functional perspective going all that way likely makes no sense.  But if the experience is something that you place value on go for it.  Lots of people do, and in many different styles.  For some people the experience and the immersion alone will make a improvement in your training.
> 
> ...



That's not what was said.  I was specifically replying to the comment that since pasta in Italy is demonstrably better than pasta elsewhere, therefore karate in Okinawa is demonstrably better than karate elsewhere.  I challenged that statement on that basis only.  The argument is a false analogy.  I can't speak for pasta, but I can speak for my own training.  

I entirely get that visiting Okinawa has its own rewards that are quite aside from the actual training.  That wasn't what I was replying to.


----------



## O'Malley (Jan 4, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> And I would argue that Tissier Sensei may be a better choice, since he's more likely to understand the culture you live in and practice the art in.



He might, or he might not. The reason I think that it would be beneficial to train with him is because his aikido is amazing and if I want to "steal" good aikido for myself it makes sense to try to get it from such a teacher. But I think the same about the other top practicioners in the world (such as our Dany Leclerre Shihan, first aikido 7th dan in Belgian history).

I'm not sure how much Tissier Shihan understanding Western/French culture would make him a better teacher to learn from than, say, our current Doshu or the top guys at Hombu Dojo. It might help, but it's also possible that the emphasis put on a concept by another teacher "clicks" better with me. Or it could be the personality of a particular teacher, or the environment of the classes.

It might be because aikido is a very personal art, everyone does the same thing but with different "flavours" even when they trained under the same person, putting emphasis on different shades of the art (Tohei vs Shioda vs Saotome vs Yamaguchi vs Kisshomaru Ueshiba Doshu). Even as a beginner, I can feel those differences in my own aikido club and I've seen it before in Kajukenbo, even between people of the same rank.



Bill Mattocks said:


> That's not what was said.  I was specifically replying to the comment that since pasta in Italy is demonstrably better than pasta elsewhere, therefore karate in Okinawa is demonstrably better than karate elsewhere.  I challenged that statement on that basis only.  The argument is a false analogy.  I can't speak for pasta, but I can speak for my own training.
> 
> I entirely get that visiting Okinawa has its own rewards that are quite aside from the actual training.  That wasn't what I was replying to.



As I said before, you replied to a statement that was not made on this thread.

Is an Okinawan teacher necessarily better than an American teacher just because he's from Okinawa? No, he isn't. It depends on both teachers' practice of the art and what you'll get from training with them.

Does it mean that if you've got a good teacher in America you "have no one to visit in Okinawa" for training purposes? Well, if you're satisfied with your training it's perfectly ok to stay in the US and be a "serious karateka". However, if you're curious about other perspectives to broaden your understanding of the art you might want to check out other good teachers. In your Isshin Ryu, it seems that the son of the founder teaches in Okinawa (I looked it up). He might not be a better teacher for you but he might bring something valuable to the table, something that some people would want to check out.

To the OP, if you want to try that journey, search for a respected teacher from Okinawa and go find out if he has what you seek. If anything, you'll have an adventure to talk about.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 4, 2017)

O'Malley said:


> He might, or he might not. The reason I think that it would be beneficial to train with him is because his aikido is amazing and if I want to "steal" good aikido for myself it makes sense to try to get it from such a teacher. But I think the same about the other top practicioners in the world (such as our Dany Leclerre Shihan, first aikido 7th dan in Belgian history).
> 
> I'm not sure how much Tissier Shihan understanding Western/French culture would make him a better teacher to learn from than, say, our current Doshu or the top guys at Hombu Dojo. It might help, but it's also possible that the emphasis put on a concept by another teacher "clicks" better with me. Or it could be the personality of a particular teacher, or the environment of the classes.
> 
> It might be because aikido is a very personal art, everyone does the same thing but with different "flavours" even when they trained under the same person, putting emphasis on different shades of the art (Tohei vs Shioda vs Saotome vs Yamaguchi vs Kisshomaru Ueshiba Doshu). Even as a beginner, I can feel those differences in my own aikido club and I've seen it before in Kajukenbo, even between people of the same rank.



Agreed. My point was simply that, for most people (hence the 'may be'), it's easier to learn from someone with similar cultural references. Your references would be similar to those of Tissier (who I referred to because I know his reputation well), so his analogies would likely be more immediately meaningful than a similarly skilled instructor from an Eastern culture. As you said, though, sometimes it's the differences that make some idea "click", so I'm by no means saying there's no value in studying under someone from a different culture. I simply don't like it when folks assert that there is some inherent superiority in the instruction that is closest to the original culture. That imputes a lesser value to the teaching of those like Tissier (and, I assume, Leclerre) who have risen to a similar level of ability in technique and teaching.


----------



## Buka (Jan 5, 2017)

Bottom line to me - if you can, why wouldn't you go to Okinawa? Or anywhere else you want to go, for that matter?


----------



## JR 137 (Jan 5, 2017)

I don't know much about Gung Fu, so I can't really comment on China vs everywhere else.  But what I know of Okinawan karate...

A lot of the current schools here in the States were started by service men stationed in Okinawa.  Those men were there for a few years, trained in karate, and brought it back home.  My question is how advanced we're those original students?  Were they taught some sort of accelerated program in the few years they were there and came back as true masters of the art, or did they learn a little more than the basics (relatively speaking)? By all accounts they were quite good and no-nonsense hard nosed guys who were badasses.  But how "advanced" was their training?  Did they make regular trips back and/or bring their teachers here to get further training?  One could argue that going to Okinawa to learn stuff those teachers didn't learn would advance the art here.

However that was quite some time ago, and many Okinawans have come here, and many Americans have gone back.

But I'm really left with an interesting analogy - the further I get from Buffalo, NY, the worse the wings get.  They can acceptable elsewhere, but my 2 years in the Buffalo area for grad school taught me what Buffalo wings really are.  Same for pizza in NYC.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 5, 2017)

JR 137 said:


> I don't know much about Gung Fu, so I can't really comment on China vs everywhere else.  But what I know of Okinawan karate...
> 
> A lot of the current schools here in the States were started by service men stationed in Okinawa.  Those men were there for a few years, trained in karate, and brought it back home.  My question is how advanced we're those original students?  Were they taught some sort of accelerated program in the few years they were there and came back as true masters of the art, or did they learn a little more than the basics (relatively speaking)? By all accounts they were quite good and no-nonsense hard nosed guys who were badasses.  But how "advanced" was their training?  Did they make regular trips back and/or bring their teachers here to get further training?  One could argue that going to Okinawa to learn stuff those teachers didn't learn would advance the art here.
> 
> ...


There's some real truth in your analogy, JR. The truth is that the wings aren't worse further from Buffalo - they're just not real "Buffalo" wings. They change as they move further away, mostly meeting the tastes of the region they move into. Some folks will prefer the wings in the South, though they're not objectively better than those in Buffalo. The same goes, in many ways, for the MA as they move further from their source.

Your point about the short initial study is valid, as is your observation that there has been continued interaction since then. I'd say distance from the source is a valid issue early in an art's expansion, because a new instructor has little additional interaction with others in the art. After a point (and we're well past that point in most arts), that's not an issue, since there are many others bringing ideas and understanding for the new instructor to interact with. NGA is a good example of this. There was a single point of transmission (Richard Bowe, who brought the art to the US). It must have been difficult for him to gain additional understanding of the art as he was teaching it, since he didn't have any other advanced practitioners nearby to work with. Now, however, there are enough advanced practitioners (at least on the Eastern seabord) for ideas to spawn and grow as well here as they would at the source (if the source had active instructors in the art).


----------



## JR 137 (Jan 5, 2017)

gpseymour said:


> There's some real truth in your analogy, JR. The truth is that the wings aren't worse further from Buffalo - they're just not real "Buffalo" wings. They change as they move further away, mostly meeting the tastes of the region they move into. Some folks will prefer the wings in the South, though they're not objectively better than those in Buffalo. The same goes, in many ways, for the MA as they move further from their source.
> 
> Your point about the short initial study is valid, as is your observation that there has been continued interaction since then. I'd say distance from the source is a valid issue early in an art's expansion, because a new instructor has little additional interaction with others in the art. After a point (and we're well past that point in most arts), that's not an issue, since there are many others bringing ideas and understanding for the new instructor to interact with. NGA is a good example of this. There was a single point of transmission (Richard Bowe, who brought the art to the US). It must have been difficult for him to gain additional understanding of the art as he was teaching it, since he didn't have any other advanced practitioners nearby to work with. Now, however, there are enough advanced practitioners (at least on the Eastern seabord) for ideas to spawn and grow as well here as they would at the source (if the source had active instructors in the art).



I guess you are now the source.  I wonder how NGA would be if it was reintroduced to Japan.  Or even introduced to the west coast.

On karate in the US vs in Okinawa...

I don't know anyone who's spent any time training there recently (besides a few people who did "back in the day").  I've seen some videos of karate training in Okinawa.  Seems quite different than what's common here.  The techniques seem close enough, but the training itself seems very different.  Lots of body hardening/conditioning.  Strategy and application seem different than what I commonly see here.

But all of that has to be taken with a grain of salt.  Those are just videos.  Some of them, such as Samurai Spirit: Karate and Tee: The Spirit of Okinawan Karate could be considered propaganda films, for lack of a better phase.  Seeing videos of guys like Morio Higaonna and Taira Masaji seem like they're doing things differently than what I see as the norm here.

Then again, there are plenty of Okinawan born and raised karateka on a seminar circuit (again, for lack of a better phrase) here.  My former sensei routinely attends Masaji seminars and has recently received rank or some sort of public acknowledgement from Masaji.

I don't know; it all gets a bit confusing to me.  I guess the only way to really see if there's a difference is to personally spend a good amount of time training there.  Not going to happen any time soon for a lot of reasons.


----------



## Gerry Seymour (Jan 5, 2017)

JR 137 said:


> I guess you are now the source.  I wonder how NGA would be if it was reintroduced to Japan.  Or even introduced to the west coast.



There's a bit of representation on the west coast (at least in the northwest). There's an instructor who has a vision for reintroducing NGA to Japan, and wants to see a dojo in Hokkaido again by 2020. I won't be doing that, but I'd certainly put for the effort to visit if someone did.


----------

