# Karate and Weapons.



## arnisador (Nov 1, 2003)

I've heard it suggested that all Karate techniques are really weapons techniques--that the kata are designed to allow one to practice the techniques for fighting with weapons without those weapons. For example, doesn't the spearhand make more sense if one imagines a bladed weapon in that hand?

I think the suggestion that _all_ Karate techniques are really weapons techniques is intentionally exaggerated so as to be provacative, but still I find it interesting to review sequences of techniques and ask myself if I can imagine them as weapons techniques.

Does anyone practice what are usually thought of as empty-hand kata using weapons?


----------



## stickarts (Nov 1, 2003)

i have often tried various weapons and translated them into my emptyhand forms. some forms adapt well and some don't!
I also have my advanced ranks try this drill. I think it is a good learning experience. If nothing else, it is good to try and think "outside of the box" every so often.


----------



## angrywhitepajamas (Nov 30, 2003)

The ueichiryu kata seisan with fans or sai's


----------



## lhommedieu (Nov 30, 2003)

I've practiced Chinese forms that adaped quite well to weapons.  One, in particular, is initially taught as an empty hand version - but is later taught with double sai or double dagger.

I think that if you practice with weapons a lot it becomes easier to pick out the logical implications of "empty hand" forms for weapons.  These can often take place during the _transitions_from one technique to another, as well replacing the empty hand technique.  

Best,

Steve Lamade


----------



## drunken mistress (Feb 5, 2004)

By chance my 7 year old son discovered that practicing katas with a plastic sword worked rather well. I´m happier for him to use his toy sword like this as the different directions in Shiozuki and Pinan katas tend to ensure he doesn´t poke himself in the face as he probably would if he was just whacking the sword around.


----------



## vincefuess (Feb 9, 2004)

I have practiced all of the Kenpo techniques with various weapons in hand, and am continually amazed at how easily they adapt.  The technique "Five Swords" works great with a set of Tonfa.

The problem most stylists have with weapons is that once they have the weapon in hand it becomes their sole focus.  Look at the weapoin as just another part of your body, and all kinds of doors open for you.


----------



## gojukylie (Feb 16, 2004)

The only weapon that I have used to substitue the empty hand is the Sai. Makes for a different application to your techniques and helps keep your wrists strong and straight. I must say however that kata is a library available to Karateka. Study them and broaden your horizons for I have found answers whilst doing so.  artyon:


----------



## arnisador (Jul 3, 2005)

I agree that the sai often fits better than many other weapons. Look at gojushiho kata with and without it, for instance.

Is there really a style of karate that uses the _fan_ as a weapon? It must be a Japanese style?


----------



## Randy Strausbaugh (Jul 3, 2005)

Years ago when I studied Okinawan karate, I used to do Fuku Gata Ichi with a staff.  Worked out OK, but never took it further than that.  I also did our style's staff form empty-handed, and came up with what I then considered revolutionary techniques.  Then I studied Kenpo and found out that my "revolutionary" techniques were common knowledge.  Ah, well... .


----------



## Makalakumu (Jul 3, 2005)

I'm very skeptical of this claim.  I've seen an attempted demonstration.  Yet, many bunkai are specifically "hand" orientated.  If this is a deeper kata level, then it is really deep, because I don't think that the weapon techniques presented in the demonstration(s) i've seen are very effective.  Maybe a more knowledgeable practioner could work them out...

Unfortunately, this may just be one of the many misunderstandings presented regarding kata.


----------



## searcher (Jul 3, 2005)

I would have to say that the practise of empty hand is intended to lead a karateka to the practise of weapons.    One thing to remember is that weapons are supposed to be an extension of your body.    If you have not mastered the movement of your body then you can't really get down the use of a weapon.

It is good to have students try and put a weapon into an empty hand form.   It makes them step back and think a little.


----------



## Gene Williams (Jul 4, 2005)

I think it is reaching to try to fit weapons into empty hand kata. There are weapons kata from various Okinawan ryu that are plenty to keep you busy. I call doing empty hand kata with weapons "playing." Its o.k. if you don't take it too seriously and think you have created something or discovered something new. As for all empty hand kata being weapons kata...forget it. Not so.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Jul 4, 2005)

I had the opportunity to meet GM Taika Oyata (Ryukyu Kempo). What he told me is that the weapon katas are actually used to enhance open hand techniques. 

 :asian:


----------



## arnisador (Jul 4, 2005)

Gene Williams said:
			
		

> I think it is reaching to try to fit weapons into empty hand kata. There are weapons kata from various Okinawan ryu that are plenty to keep you busy.


 Yes, I agree. Adding weapons to empty hand kata sometimes works but on balance I think it's a stretch. As you point out, there isn't a shortage of legitimate kobudo forms to practice!


----------



## arnisador (Jul 4, 2005)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> I had the opportunity to meet GM Taika Oyata (Ryukyu Kempo). What he told me is that the weapon katas are actually used to enhance open hand techniques.


 There's an idea I've heard before! But, I've never had a karate instructor say it to me--there I generally heard it the other way, that one should focus on empty hand techniques and the weapon techniques would follow naturally from them (similar to *searcher*'s comments above).


----------



## Gene Williams (Jul 4, 2005)

I'm not sure what Oyata meant. I've been to a seminar of his, and have trained with several of his dan. They don't do as many waepons as other ryu, but the weapons kata are separate from the empty hand kata, many of which are the same ones we do. He may have just meant that doing weapons kata will help and supplement your empty hand kata, and I agree with that.


----------



## Datu Tim Hartman (Jul 4, 2005)

Gene Williams said:
			
		

> I'm not sure what Oyata meant. I've been to a seminar of his, and have trained with several of his dan. They don't do as many waepons as other ryu, but the weapons kata are separate from the empty hand kata, many of which are the same ones we do. He may have just meant that doing weapons kata will help and supplement your empty hand kata, and I agree with that.




He was teaching a sai kata and demonstrated how certain strikes with the sai actually were used to practice punches as well as the blocks for locks and throws.

 :asian:


----------



## Gene Williams (Jul 4, 2005)

Many of the weapons stances and hand techniques presuppose some knowledge of karate. I think it would be a lot harder to go from weapons to karate than the other way around.


----------



## arnisador (Jul 4, 2005)

Yes, I think the Karate helps more with the Kubudo _at first_ than the other way around. Just learning the common stances, for example, is easier without the weapon, I feel.

But at the higher level, I can also see where punching with a sai or tonfa could help one's Karate. I think this must be what Mr. Oyata was referring to--for those with more experience.


----------



## Gene Williams (Jul 4, 2005)

Well, I wasn't there, so I don't know. Generally speaking, weapons change a lot of things. Your focus is on the striking surface of the weapon (mono uchi) and not the same as punching. The weapon itself is hard or sharp and so you do not have to strike or punch with the same type of focus as in punching. You need less power to injure or disable your opponent, as well. As a rule, kobudo stances do not have to be as deep, as you do not need the same foundation for weapons use as you need for punching or kicking. Distancing is different, which also changes how you focus. Now, with sai, tonfa, and nunchaku, many of the locks and traps are the same as empty handed. The older weapons kata are just that...weapons kata. The focus is on the weapon. Very few kicks, very few punches. Lots of techniques for when someone grabs the weapon or tries to disarm you. I think karate students who try to import weapons techniques into empty hand kata, most of the time, are barking up the wrong tree.


----------



## Sapper6 (Jul 4, 2005)

the weapon is only an extension of the hand holding it.  it's best not to become lacksidasical in stancess and basics just because your wielding a weapon.


----------



## searcher (Jul 4, 2005)

Not sure what Mr. Oyata meant either, but since using weapons does tend to strengthen your muscles I could see where weapons could help with empty-hand.  In a round about sort of way.   It is similar to the use of other implements the Okinawans used to condition their bodies.


----------



## Gene Williams (Jul 4, 2005)

Sapper6 said:
			
		

> the weapon is only an extension of the hand holding it. it's best not to become lacksidasical in stancess and basics just because your wielding a weapon.


Well, the weapon is a little more than an extension of the hand holding it. My hands do not have blades on them, nor are they six feet long. That is a meaningless cliche'. You do not become "lacksidasical" because you are wielding a weapon, it is just different. The "extension of the hand" thing is a way of saying that one should become so familiar with the weapon that it "seems" just an extension of the hand.


----------



## Sapper6 (Jul 4, 2005)

Gene Williams said:
			
		

> Well, the weapon is a little more than an extension of the hand holding it. My hands do not have blades on them, nor are they six feet long. That is a meaningless cliche'. You do not become "lacksidasical" because you are wielding a weapon, it is just different. The "extension of the hand" thing is a way of saying that one should become so familiar with the weapon that it "seems" just an extension of the hand.



the weapon can only do what your body tells it to do.  it only only goes where your hand leads it.

i know exactly what i said and what it means to ME, perhaps not you.

you're saying you can get by with less of a foundation just because you're hold a weapon?  i disagree. foundation is important regardless of weapons, either natural or artificial. :asian: 

so you can lack in focus just because you've got a weapon?  i again, disagree.  in some cases, you would require even more focus than empty hand execution, for the simple fact you can injure yourself in the process, or even injure your attacker on a larger scale than necessary.

i agree completely on the idea of less power with techniques involving weapons.


----------



## Gene Williams (Jul 4, 2005)

I don't think you understood what I said, but never mind.


----------



## Sapper6 (Jul 4, 2005)

Gene Williams said:
			
		

> I don't think you understood what I said, but never mind.



i understood completely :asian: 

cheers man, it's all relative. :supcool:


----------



## sauzin25 (Aug 19, 2005)

Datu Puti said:
			
		

> I had the opportunity to meet GM Taika Oyata (Ryukyu Kempo). What he told me is that the weapon katas are actually used to enhance open hand techniques.
> 
> :asian:


I agree with this but I don't think it really applies much the other way around.  Simply put, empty hand kata were made to work best with just your hands.  A spear hand is no exception.  If you look at the technique before and after the spear hand you will see why it works better with your hands empty.

Of course there are principles taught with empty hand kata that apply to weapons but to really learn a weapon there are many other principles you must know.  Principles you can't learn from empty hand kata.  

I think that is what Oyata is referring to.  There are things you learn when learning a weapon and kata made specifically for that weapon that are hard to teach without the use of the weapon.  These things are required for effective use of the weapon but they also enhance and shed light on other aspects of empty handed techniques.  This at least has been my experience.:asian:


----------



## JAMJTX (Aug 19, 2005)

I would not say ALL karate kata.  But I believe most were based on weapons kata.

You can do a lot of experimenting on your own.  Take some of the traditional Okinawan weapons and just do the kata and see what comes out.

I was looking further into this myeself recently.  I always had an inkling of this idea.  Then I came across someone who was teaching this idea as a form of advanced training.  I then asked someone else who has been doing Kobudo for a long time.  This person agreed that I was essentially on the right track but it was a very narrow minded form of training.


----------



## RRouuselot (Aug 21, 2005)

JAMJTX said:
			
		

> I would not say ALL karate kata.  But I believe most were based on weapons kata.




What did you base this idea on? Can you give some verifiable examples.....like which kata specifically are based on weapons kata?


----------



## JAMJTX (Aug 22, 2005)

I can't give you specific examples of what karate kata were based on weapons kata.  Yet.  This is something I am going to try and look further into.

But you can start doing experimenting on your own and go through the basic kata.  Take the Pinan kata for example.  Just put some tonfa in your hands and go through the kata.  You will start to understand. 

This one area where Gene Williams may have some knowledge or input.  I understand, as I have been told, that Shogo Kuniba used to require karate students to perform the karate kata with weapons so they would understand the relationship between karate and kobudo.

The person that told me this has his students do this as a form of advanced training.  One can look at it as being advanced karate. 

I originally looked at it as a way of introducing karate students to basic kobudo, using kata that they already knew before learning more advanced kobudo.

I asked for some advice from a senior instructor who is both a high a ranking Shotokan instructor with 40 years of kobudo experience and whose historical knowledge I have a lot of regard for.  He had told me that yes, many karate kata were based on kobudo.  But he also said that "any idiot can" do karate kata with a weapon in his hand and suggested that I find a qualified kobudo teacher instead.

I am going to take his advice and not try to introduce kobudo that way, but it is still interesting historical research. 

Jim Mc Coy


----------



## The Kai (Aug 23, 2005)

Putting a tonfa in your hands while doing pinan 4, you are not working a weapon kata-but a empty hand kata with weapons in your hands.  Using a weapon requires adjustments in your stance, timing and mostly applications

Also there are thing that you can and cannot do empty handed that work with a weapon and vice versa


----------



## JAMJTX (Aug 23, 2005)

This may be true, but you can still see the relationship.  Also, kata are always slightly modified to show variations on the bunkai, so making adjustments to see how the weapons apply is not necessarily wrong.

But although it sounded like a good idea to me for a short while, I have to go with the opinions that it is a poor way to learn how to use the weapons. 

Jim Mc Coy


----------



## chinto (Jun 14, 2007)

arnisador said:


> I've heard it suggested that all Karate techniques are really weapons techniques--that the kata are designed to allow one to practice the techniques for fighting with weapons without those weapons. For example, doesn't the spearhand make more sense if one imagines a bladed weapon in that hand?
> 
> I think the suggestion that _all_ Karate techniques are really weapons techniques is intentionally exaggerated so as to be provacative, but still I find it interesting to review sequences of techniques and ask myself if I can imagine them as weapons techniques.
> 
> Does anyone practice what are usually thought of as empty-hand kata using weapons?


 

yes and no. kobujitsu was an art before karate was. and meany of the things they knew from using weapons was incorperated into the art. that is part of what was blended with the chinese influince that came in  to karate.


----------



## stickarts (Jun 14, 2007)

I translate weapons to emtyhand and vice versa.
Some directly apply and some don't but it still makes a good study.


----------



## Grenadier (Jun 14, 2007)

Kobudo is used as a supplement to our empty hand training, since the armed, and empty hand training compliments each other.  

It's especially useful when people are able to better understand the concept of using leverage, and the physics behind such movements.  In the Yamanni Ryu kobudo system that we practice, the emphasis is on flowing, long strikes, but shorter, quicker blocks, and people are able to understand how torque plays an important role in both armed, and unarmed combat.


----------



## arnisador (Jun 14, 2007)

stickarts said:


> I translate weapons to emtyhand and vice versa.
> Some directly apply and some don't but it still makes a good study.



Yes, it's always interesting and fruitful to think about whether and how an empty hand technique could be applied as a weapon technique! Many go over to the knife, for example, though of course with varying degrees of success.


----------



## eyebeams (Jun 14, 2007)

It should be remembered that kobudo as we know it know is pretty recent. Most kobu-gata were originally pretty short. I remember stories about one early karateka who made an effort to collect as many of these as possible. 

In terms of empty handed stuff, people do sometimes take it too far. There was a guy claiming sanchin was supposed to go with sai, but this is plainly ludicrous, since we can now actually see the Chinese version of it, and there aren't any weapons. I did see some Fujian baihequan (a known ancestor of karate) that uses double butterfly swords with heavy tines though.


----------



## chinto (Jun 18, 2007)

stickarts said:


> I translate weapons to emtyhand and vice versa.
> Some directly apply and some don't but it still makes a good study.


 

 very true.  meany of the techniques are at the very least similer, and then some are of course spacifice to the weapon or empty hand use.  but there is something to be learned either way, and to be rememberd.


----------



## chinto (Aug 7, 2007)

arnisador said:


> Yes, it's always interesting and fruitful to think about whether and how an empty hand technique could be applied as a weapon technique! Many go over to the knife, for example, though of course with varying degrees of success.


 

yes and also some weapons techniques are also useble with objects around you, eku for instance would work fairly well with a shovel or spade in a pinch.  and there are things in the eku kata that work very well empty handed and others that do not as you said. just as there are things in meany empty hand kata that work with some weapons well.


----------

