Mekosho said:
First off, thanks for all the input on this subject...
secondly,
1. I never thought for a second I had been learning "pure" Kosho by any stretch of the imagination.
2.The question I am wondering however is this...just how pure (not that it matters if what is taught works) is ANY art out there anymore? I mean, most instructors nowadays hold rank in 2,3, even 4 or more different styles, is it actually possible to say "okay class, I have shown you a kempo tech. now I will show you a shotokan tech..
.3.I mean, if i am learning a shotokan tech in a kempo class, would it not be a kempo tech now...
Thing is, I hear many debates on the practicality on this style over that style, the effectiveness of that style over this style, I mean, with all the mix in the pot anymore, I just cannot fathom the fact that so many still claim theres is superior..
4.I feel nowadays, more so than in the past, that it is the curriculum+the method of teaching style+the individual drive that makes anyone, not any system, superior over another...
Anyways, again, thanks for your thoughts on this,
Robb
1. the question of kosho being pure is a difficult one. you first have to ask yourself, "what is pure kosho?"
if you're doing the stuff that makes it kosho.....then you're doing pure kosho. kosho has nothing to do woth techniques. kosho is about understanding and applying principles. i dont know how long you have been studying kosho for now, but if you have been doing it for any length of time you should be familiar with the basics of the system. you should be familiar with the octagon,escaping, 12-6-3, always move twice-go back to where you were last.....things of that nature. in japanese martial arts everyone does the same type of strikes and kicks and joint locks......no surprise there. if you're doing kosho, its all in how you apply these things from a self defense standpoint.
i dont know if what i do is pure kosho from mitose's point of view. what i do know is, i approach my training with the principles i have been taught in kosho ryu.
2. any art that is out there now could not be considered a pure art, technically speaking. every teacher adds his own flavour, whether conscious of it or not. can the spirit of the art remain pure? i think it can.........but that is up to the individual. Ueshiba said when i die, aikido dies with me (im not sure if thats the exact quote, but its similar), which means that aikido was his art......he could try to pass on his knowledge as best he could, but the true essence of aikido was inside of him. it is the job of the students who pass on aikido to best pass on the essence, the kokoro, of aikido, that makes aikido what it is............this is just an example.
3. if you are learning a shotokan technique in class.......its just a technique from the point of view of a shotokan player, that is if you are learning a "pure" shotokan technique. But, you could take the same, lets say gedan barai, oi-zuki combination and approach it from a kosho standpoint......what have you got? we have the same movements.....its all in the approach.
4. i dont think this is just nowadays........every system has had their exceptional teachers and fighters. just because choki motobu was a great fighter, does not mean that everyone in his system is going to be a great fighter. a person requires desire, perserverance, and will in order to succeed.
dont worry about the small stuff
