7 posts / 0 new
Last post
Paul_L
Paul_L's picture
What Were Hironori Otsuka’s Philosophical Differences with Funakoshi’s Karate

I have been reading Otsuka’s Wado Ryu Karate book which contains the authors thoughts regarding the role of Karate in society and how it could bering about Peace and Harmony. I am wondering if this was the crux of the “philosophical differences” that Otsuka had with Funakoshi?

Reading between the lines you could take it this way, but there is nothing direct in the book and I haven’t yet seen anything that states what the differences were from Funakoshi’s side, so just wondering if anyone knows?

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Paul_L wrote:
I have been reading Otsuka’s Wado Ryu Karate book which contains the authors thoughts regarding the role of Karate in society and how it could bring about Peace and Harmony …

There’s a bit of historical revisionism with “Wado-Ryu”. The characters used to write “Wado-Ryu” are 和道流.

和 (wa) can be read as “peace”, but it can also be read to mean “Japanese”.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wa_(Japanese_culture)

I don’t have the source to hand, but in one of Otuska’s Japanese language books, he states that the original name for his style was very pro-Japan to the point where his jujutsuka colleagues advised him to tone it down a bit. The “wa” of Wado was intended to reflect the “Japanese-ness” of his take on karate. One of Otuska’s direct students once told me, “Before WW2, things that were Japanese were thought of as being very good … after WW2, not so good.” So, in the aftermath of WW2, it was prudent to read the character to reflect “peace”; such that the “Japanese way” became the “peaceful way”.

Otuska also studied karate with Mabuni, believing he understood the kata better than Funakoshi. To be fair, in Funakoshi’s introduction to Mabuni’s 1934 book “Seipai no Kenkyu” Funakoshi himself said of Mabuni that, “it is no exaggeration to say that [Mabuni] is the most knowledgeable karate teacher”.

Otsuka also studied with Motobu; who Funakoshi didn’t get on with at all! Motobu had a big influence on the two-person drills of Wado.

Otuska’s Shindo Yoshin Ryu Jujutsu also had a huge influence on his Wado, and that may have not gone down well with Funakoshi. In his book “Karate-Do Nyumon” Funakoshi wrote:

“There are people who try to blend a little jujutsu with a little karate. The result is strange and unworthy of being called either.”

Is that a dig at Otsuka? It’s not clear. However, a little later in the same section he states:

“As far as I know, the only styles that have been handed down from the past are the Goju-Ryu of Master Miyagi, and the Shito-Ryu of Master Mabuni. I have never given a name to the karate I am studying, but some of my students call it Shotokan-ryu.”

That whole section is about “aberrations” in karate styles, and he only lists the above three as being legitimate. So, if not his intent, you can certainly read it as being a dig.

I think people growing apart due to divergent views developing over time is normal enough. I think that’s all that happened.

All the best,

Iain

JD
JD's picture

Wow, what Iain posted regards Funakoshi's statements is really interesting, I'm a Wado ryu practitoner and to think the 'father of modern karate' had a more than subtle dig at Otsuka because of his hybrid version of karate using both jujutsu and karate together is quite comical, I guess people are people the world over and even though they're the 'masters', they still disagree, not get along and squable!  

JD

Anf
Anf's picture

Interesting info provided by Iain.

I like the quote where Funakoshi blatantly has a go at those that try to add a bit of jiujutsu. Two things spring to mind though, firstly, for such a renowned martial artist, it seems a bit narrow minded to rule out any attempt to assimilate some stuff from one of the most highly regarded arts.

But secondly, I wonder what gave him the right to pass such judgement on his peers. Funakoshi is as has been mentioned, widely regarded to be the father of modern karate. But I think this point is often misunderstood. Funakoshi did not 'invent' modern karate the art. I'm sure he was an awesome martial artist and great man, but his legacy is his marketing skill. Funakoshi is the father of the 'karate' brand. He even discusses in his book how there were earlier names and that it was practiced slightly differently in different areas. What Funakoshi did, and I am absolutely not criticising, was to take everything he'd learned, and package it all up with a branding that would be palatable to the wider Japanese public. I'm glad he did. Had he not done so, certainly in the West, we may not have had as many opportunities as we do now. I also have no doubt he was an excellent martial artist. But there were and always will be other excellent martial artists. If one of those martial artists decides to try to unify two or more styles, exactly like Funakoshi did when creating the karate brand, then who has the right to mock them for it.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Hi All,

For those who haven’t, reading the full section of Karate-Do Nyumon is a good idea. In the post above, I’ve drawn out the bits that COULD be seen as having a go at Otsuka, because we are discussing the relationship between the two men.

The wider piece is about unqualified teachers and dubious schools. Today we have concerns about people promoting themselves to Grandmaster and developing their own “way of the ultimate ass-kicking” style. That existed back then too, and Funakoshi was rightly concerned about it. That’s what the wider piece is about.

Remember that Otsuka was one of the first people to get a blackbelt from Funakoshi, and was an assistant instructor in his dojo. Funakoshi therefore certainly regarded him as being a skilful karateka. No doubt he was an extremely skilled Jujutsuka too (master level). So, it could be Funakoshi was referring to others – who were not so skilled – fusing the two arts together badly? Otsuka certainly knew more than “a little” karate and “a little” jujutsu. So maybe not the target of that statement? That said, it was written at a time when Wado was well established, and it maybe telling that Funakoshi did not mark Wado out as an exception to his rule?

All we have is a certain “maybe”, and we should be careful from treating it as if it was a definite dig at Otsuka. Maybe it is? Maybe it isn’t? We can’t be 100% sure either way ... and maybe that was Funakoshi's intent?  Either way, it’s worth being aware of.

All the best,

Iain

Anf
Anf's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:
The wider piece is about unqualified teachers and dubious schools. Today we have concerns about people promoting themselves to Grandmaster and developing their own “way of the ultimate ass-kicking” style. That existed back then too, and Funakoshi was rightly concerned about it. That’s what the wider piece is about.

This is an excellent point, and one I must confess I had not considered. It makes perfect sense. In every club I've been involved in, across multiple styles, they've always been quite protective of their way, which I've always been fine with (I'm in no position to claim to know better than anyone), but which seemed a bit unnecessary. In my current main club, we occasionally see people do something that is clearly from another style. Our instructors never criticise the other style, but point out that in our style it is done this way. I can see now why some instructors and associations are so protective. We do occasionally see people, ironically more often lower grades, that think they know best. I hadn't considered that such people might go off and make their own style, but I guess it's inevitable that a few of them do.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Hi Anf,

I think it is good to question things; irrespective of grade. Anything with a grounding in truth is strengthened by questioning. Therefore, only falsehoods fear it.

The company of those seeking truth is a positive thing. The company of those who are adamant that they have found the ultimate “truth”, and that “truth” is beyond questioning, is never good.

In Funakoshi’s piece, he is expressing concern about people proclaiming to have knowledge that they don’t have.

Anf wrote:
We do occasionally see people, ironically more often lower grades, that think they know best. I hadn't considered that such people might go off and make their own style, but I guess it's inevitable that a few of them do.

That’s what Funakoshi is expressing concern about. I think that’s a valid concern too. However, the other side of the coin is that people can use that legitimate concern to illegitimately suppress questioning and innovation. It is common, in some quarters, to see the past masters as semi-divine beings whose levels we can never hope to equal. Therefore, any changes experienced people make today are seen as a degradation of the “perfection” reached in the 1930s.

As an example, we go loads of focus mitt drills in my dojo. My teachers were all keen on using focus mitts too. However, I have had some tell me that I am wrong to use focus mitts because the past masters didn’t use them, and I should stick solely to the makiwara instead. All kinds of things wrong with that (practically, historically and logically) but it’s an inevitable consequence of seeing the past masters as infallible.

Inexperienced people are not in a place to make meaningful changes. Funakoshi is right in what he says. However, karate does need to keep evolving. As Funakoshi also said:

“Times change, the world changes, and obviously the martial arts must change too.”

As Choshin Chibana also said:

“A pond which is not fed by a fresh stream becomes stagnant and dies ... in much the same way does the enthusiastic karateka continually modify their art".

So, there is a balance to be struck. Everyone should question. Changes are needed, but they need to be made by experienced people for the advancement of the art … not made by inexperienced people in order to try to lower the bar to their level or to indulge their own ego. In short, worry about those with “Grand Master” printed on their business cards :-)

All the best,

Iain