14 posts / 0 new
Last post
muratmat
muratmat's picture
Funakoshi sparring and kata (bunkai related)

Hello guys,

During the writing of my research, I stumbled upon a strange thing about Funakoshi.
Failing to unravel the tangle, I'm trying to write here, with the hope to get help from experts present in this forum.

I will try to expose my doubts starting from the two Funakoshi's teachers: Asato and Itosu.
Here is the list of most known/famous students of the two masters (their birth date within brackets):

- Asato had only two students: Gichin Funakoshi (1868) and Oshiro Chojo (1888). Others reported that was not Oshiro Chojo but Chōgo Osokun (???).
- Itosu had several students, the most important were: Yabu Kentsū (1866), Gichin Funakoshi (1868), Chōmo Hanashiro (1869), Chōtoku Kyan (1870), Chōsin Chibana (1885), Anbun Tokuda (1886), Oshiro Chojo (1888), Kanken Tōyama (1888), Kenwa Mabuni (1889), Shinpan Shiroma (1890).

Funakoshi began as weak, sick, and in poor health; between 1877 and 1878 he started karate training under Asato, but in 1879 he switched to Itosu (because Asato was forced to move to the imperial court of Mutsuhito).

In Karate-Dō Nyūmon (1943), Funakoshi mentioned that "During the Sino-Japanese War [1894-1895] a young man trained earnestly with Itosu for several months before joining the army...", that "young man" was Yabu Kentsū.

In "Karate-do my way of life" Funakoshi tells a little about tegumi challenges during his youth.

So my question is: given his poor health and given the age of the second wave of Itosu's students (Chibana, Tokuda, Chojo, Mabuni etc), it is possible that Funakoshi never had a real training partner with whom to practice two-person drills, yakusoku-kumite, and all that practices (shime waza, kansetsu waza, qinna, etc) needed to real understand the kata(s) ?

The only references to some "realistic" bunkai are shown in Kyohan, the nage waza section (the 9 throws and links to kata): and this could be explained by the friendship and sponsorship of Jigorō Kanō and by the tegumi practice. Is it possible that Itosu passed to Funakoshi the "new" way on which he worked (and formalized/spread at the beginning of the new century), made of a simplified tode (I don't mean simplified kata, but simplified tode/practice) ?

Many thanks in advance!

ShotoRick
ShotoRick's picture

I would probably guess that Itosu maybe had more students than the ones you metioned above. As like in today's schools students come and go and you tend to only really remember or point out the ones that were really good (or really bad, lol) or stuck around for a long time. Like a lot of karate history the answer is most likely lost to time.

I thought I remembered in one of his books he mentions that he used to do a kata and the kata application over and over again until Itosu approved before moving on to the next kata, you can't really do the application part without another person. I could be wrong about that part though.

Marc
Marc's picture

ShotoRick wrote:

I would probably guess that Itosu maybe had more students than the ones you metioned above.

In "Karate-Do - My Way of Life" Gichin Funakoshi tells an anecdote from his time with master Itosu (starting on page 49):

[...] I went there one evening with Master Itosu and half a dozen other karateka for a moon-viewing party.

[...] Finally we decided that it was indeed time to go home [... and on the way] we were about to be attacked.

[... One of the attackers] started to grab me by the chest. I lowered my hips into a karate stance. But at that moment I heard Itosu's voice: "No fighting, Funakoshi! Listen to what they have to say. Talk to them."

[...] we were joined by a group of men [... who] turned to the gang that wanted to attack us: "What, are you guys crazy? [...] That's Itosu, the karate master, with his students. Ten or even twenty of you couldn't beat them in a free-for-all. You'd better apologize, and you'd better be quick about it!"

Here we learn that Funakoshi was one among half a dozen students of Itosu's during that field trip. And appearently they were able to defend themselves if indeed necessary - at least Funakoshi thought they would have been. The situation did resolve peacefully.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

I think that’s a very shaky hypothesis. It’s also not born out by Funakoshi’s own writings when he reminisces about his early training. Funakoshi strikes me as being very aware of the true nature of kata; even if he is not focusing on that to a large extent in his books.

We need to remember that Funakoshi was writing for an audience; and that audience was one who were pursuing karate as a “modern budo”. That was what was fashionable and popular. In his books we can see the shadow of what went before – and a few concreate examples – but his writings reflect how karate was being practised at the time of writing i.e. less and less emphasis on the applications of the kata, and more and more on their performance. We can even track this in the books and see the shift taking place. The obvious explanation for this is that he is writing for his audience. It seems unnecessary and extremely doubtful to put this down to him having no training partners. “If you hear hoof beats, think horses and not zebras” would seem to be a pertinent phrase.

When karate was a combative art practised by a very small number of people, there is no need for books and no market for them. When it spread, then for the first time there is a need and a market for books on karate … and those books are going to be written to reflect the karate of the time.

I don’t think we need to go beyond that to explain why there’s not a huge amount on kata applications in the books. To me, the books firmly suggest that he understood kata and had practised it combatively during his early training, but karate had moved on at the time of writing so he is writing about that karate of that time. As the man himself said:

“Time change, the world changes, and obviously the martial arts must change too. The karate that high school students practise today is not the same karate that was practised even are recently as ten years ago, and it is a long way indeed from the karate I learned when I was a child in Okinawa”.

All the best,

Iain

muratmat
muratmat's picture

ShotoRic, Marc, Iain,

Thanks very much for your quick response, your help is really appreciated.
I'd like to pount out some aspects:

- Itosu was born in 1930 (others report 1831) and died in 1915 (85 years old)

- There are two phases in Itosu life, for simplicity I will call them ItosuOLD and ItosuNEW

- ItosuNEW starts with the beginning of the new century, the task was to bring karate out from the shadows into the light of public study.
In 1901 he began instructing karate at the Shuri Jinjo Primary school and taught at the Dai Ichi middle school and the Okinawa prefectural Men's Normal School in 1905.
In October of 1908 he wrote his famous letter of "Tode Jukun" to draw the attention of both the Ministry of Education.
Starting from 1901 Funakoshi actively participated at various karate demonstrations organized by Itosu, in order to promote the art publicly.
Karate taught during ItosuNEW was a simplified tode (kata were simplified too in order to make them more attractive/dynamic and with the intention to hide the most dangerous techniques).
At the beginning of ItosuNEW the second wave of Itosu's students (Chibana, Tokuda, Chojo, Mabuni etc) were 13 years old on average.

- During ItosuOLD the masters were used to accept very few pupils for the teaching: we could say that masters were really "choosy". For example, Funakoshi was introduced to Asato by his grandfather, when Asato moved to the imperial court of Mutsuhito was accepted by Itosu because was introduced by Asato.

Iain, can you think of names and historical references that can confirm that Funakoshi practiced karate, under Itosu between 1879 and 1890, together other students?
Did he learn realistic bunkai under Itosu, taking advantage and experience from two-person practices?

Many thanks in advance!

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

muratmat wrote:
Iain, can you think of names and historical references that can confirm that Funakoshi practiced karate, under Itosu between 1879 and 1890, together other students?

I think that’s the wrong way to approach it. The burden of proof for these things lies with the one making the claim.

If we are to run with the idea Funakoshi never learned applications because he was a lonely solo student, then we need to provide firm evidence that that was the case. That’s also not the same as saying he was alone either. You also need to explain why Itosu himself never got hands on with his student?

Even if Funakoshi was as a solo student, then why could he not practise with his teacher?

That’s how I do it when I’ve working with an individual. Indeed, I get hands on with people every time I teach, even when in groups, so they can feel what I’m doing and I can feel what they are doing.

Karate does not have very detailed records. We therefore need to be careful that we avoid logical fallacies when trying to piece things back together from what little we have.

It would be an example of what is referred to as “Russell’s Teapot” to state, “There is no firm evidence (i.e. a dated group photo) to say Funakoshi wasn’t a lone student and therefore he was one”.

There is Funakoshi’s tales of being part of a group (i.e. the one in the post above) and while it true we don’t have an exact date for that, the fact we don’t have such a date also means we can’t exclude it from the time period you’re asking about.

The lack of much bunkai in books is best explained by the reasons in my above post.

Funakoshi never once mentions he was a lone student for 11 years. If he was, then that would be remarkable. The fact he never mentioned that remarkable fact, even more remarkable. The fact no one else mentions Funakoshi was a lone student for so long is also remarkable. The fact he never mentions is it best explained by the fact it never happened (Ockham’s Razor).

For your hypostasis to work, even if Funakoshi as a lone student, then Itosu would have to have some reason for not working hands on with his own student. Is there such a reason? And if so, what evidence do we have for this?

There is no doubt that Funakoshi primarily worked to spread the “new karate”, but we know from his own words that he practised the “old karate” too. For example,

“Time change, the world changes, and obviously the martial arts must change too. The karate that high school students practise today is not the same karate that was practised even are recently as ten years ago, and it is a long way indeed from the karate I learned when I was a child in Okinawa”.

So we can say with confidence he leant the old version of the art.

The second part of your hypothesis is based on the idea that Funakoshi never got to grips with the old version of the art due to a lack of training partners. For that to be true you’d need to firmly show that:

A, That’s true … and while it is theoretically possible, it is highly unlikely given the weight of evidence to the contrary.

B, And even if it was true, that Itosu never practised hands on with his lone student.

For both those things to be true, it would be extraordinary. Ockham’s Razor would have us favour the explanation with the least assumptions: Which would be that Funakoshi did learn the old art (as he said he did) and that he was not excluded from two-person practise due to a lack of  training partners and Itosu’s unexplained reluctance to teach hands on.

There are simpler ways to explain what Funakoshi shows in his books – that don’t require us to put the “remarkably unlikely” into any gaps – and it would suggest it is much safer to run with those.

All the best,

Iain

muratmat
muratmat's picture

Iain,

Thank you for your detailed response.
I agree with you about the fact that Funakoshi books must be intended in the Itosu-guided perspective: the spread of karate to the masses.
I think it is not a case that Rentan and Kyohan were written and published by Funakoshi only after moving to mainland (i.e. Japan).

As you noticed, there is no firm evidence (i.e. a dated group photo) to say Funakoshi wasn’t a lone student.
In addition, in his books he didn't mention a single student (i.e. training partner) with whom he practiced, even to tell some possible funny anecdote.
I'm practicing Shotokai (Egami lineage) since I was 13 (now I'm 40), and I can still remember a lot of gym fellows that shared with me pain and sweat.
I remember of them for different reasons: some were tough, some others were technically gifted.
We know that masters, in the past, accepted private students in a very small number; but is it possible that Funakoshi didn't mention a single training partner?

You asked:
"even if Funakoshi as a lone student, then Itosu would have to have some reason for not working hands on with his own student. Is there such a reason? And if so, what evidence do we have for this?"

An important aspect to consider is the health status of Funakoshi: he born prematurely and as a teenager he was sickly and weak (unfortunately we do not know exactly what kind of health problems suffered).
One of the fundamental aspects of teaching is that children and teenagers do not have to practice dangerous techniques until they have reached physical and psychological maturity to master them. For example, because of the weakness of the anatomical structure of their young bodies in growth, the application of choking / strangulation techniques is too dangerous: children and teenagers must not practice shime waza for no reason.
Funakoshi practiced as an Itosu student from 1879, he was 11 years old and he was weak.
It is therefore likely that Itosu did not pass to Funakoshi shime waza, even if he had same age partners / students.
For the same reasons, it is likely that Funakoshi didn't practice painful joints manipulation (kansetsu waza) nor kyusho based techniques.

I'm not saying that Funakoshi didn't learn the "old way", but that he could have learned just a part of the "old way".

We have clear evidence that Itosu passed to Funakoshi some key aspects of the "old way":
- correct understading of "blocks" (i.e. parry-pass, blocks as attacks and so on)
- correct understanding and usage of hikite
- use of nage waza (borrowed from judo)
- related to nage waza, grapling and close combat techniques were definitely part of its curriculum thanks also to the practice of tegumi

Another aspect I'd like to point out: if we consider older Funakoshi's students (Obata, Kase, Egami, etc), we can note that they didn't show (at least publicly) a realistic bunkai a single time (not to mention the videos that everyone can find on youtube...).
Some of them gave evidence to know just a single aspect (and in a limited way) of the "old way", I mean some throws; which incidentally are the only ones that Funakoshi demonstrated to know as described in Kyohan.
Following the Ockham’s Razor principle, Funakoshi's students (and what it is today at JKA, Shotokai, etc) didn't teach realistic bunkai because it was not taught to them, and not even the two-person practices that can unlock kata meaning.

I want to be clear on the subject, I do not want to sound disrespectful or criticize any of the mentioned masters, indeed I respect them all for having contributed greatly to the art. I know I'm very young and have much to learn, I'm just trying to reconstruct honestly my lineage.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

I feel there’s still a lot of assumptions having to be made there. For example, you are assuming that Funakoshi was a sickly child who was well enough to train to the point of exhaustion, but was not well enough to practise hands on (so just sick enough) and because of that sickness Itosu never bothered to teach any bunkai / partner work, not even gently; in fact he never even mentioned it or gave verbal instruction. That’s does not fit with how hard Funakoshi says the training was. Add to that the assumption that Funakoshi was a lone student for over a decade … and we even have to add to that Azato also never taught Funakoshi any paired work either (if Funakoshi was to have zero knowledge of karate aside from solo kata).

You also have to explain why most of the books of the age – not just Funakoshi’s – also reflect the karate of the age. Were they all lone students too?

muratmat wrote:
I'm not saying that Funakoshi didn't learn the "old way", but that he could have learned just a part of the "old way".

The argument about how good a student Funakoshi was, and how thoroughly educated he was, is a different one from the one you initially proposed. Some around at the time were certainly critical of Funakoshi and the level of skill / knowledge he had (Motobu being a prominent example). However, that different from the assertion you made that he never learnt the “old way” because he was always a lone student who never did any partner work.

muratmat wrote:
Following the Ockham’s Razor principle, Funakoshi's students (and what it is today at JKA, Shotokai, etc) didn't teach realistic bunkai because it was not taught to them, and not even the two-person practices that can unlock kata meaning.

While it is true that many of Funakoshi’s students (who would be the “high school students” that Funakoshi said where learning a very different karate from the one he did) didn’t show and teach bunkai, we should listen to what the man himself said about that:

“The karate that high school students practise today is not the same karate that was practised even are recently as ten years ago, and it is a long way indeed from the karate I learned when I was a child in Okinawa”.

You seem to be assuming that Funakoshi never taught it because he never knew it because he was a lone student for a very long period of time (although he never mentions it), and we has too sickly for his teacher to go hands on (no matter how gently), and hence Funakoshi was lying when he said the training has hard and austere. And so on. It’s just way too much of a stretch to me on many fronts.

The simple and way more robust explanation is simply that Funakoshi’s students on mainland Japan were learning a “modern budo” and not the art that Funakoshi himself learnt. We need to make no assumptions for that and it’s what Funakoshi himself says.

The viewpoint you propose asks us to ignore things we have evidance for, and make assumptions about things for which we have no evidance for and would seem unlikely. It also raises more questions. The simple thing to do is take Funakoshi at his word; everything is explained and no assumptions are needed.

All the best,

Iain

Marc
Marc's picture

Funakoshi in "Karate-Do - My Way of Life" lists several masters under whom he had studied: Azato and Itosu of course, and Kiyuna, Tôommo, Niigaki, Matsumura. He does not, however, mention his fellow karateka. Why, I do not know. Maybe it was deemed impolite to mention them? He was indeed aquainted with basically all other important karate figures from Okinawa.

Anyway, he sometimes hints that there were fellow students, like when he writes: "[Azato] always sat ramrod stiff on the balcony when we worked outside".

He knew about the large variety of techniques in karate: "in karate, hitting, thrusting, and kicking are not the only methods; throwing techniques and pressure against joints are also included." (This is from Kyohan)

He also explained how karate should be trained with realistic self-defence situations in mind (again from Kyohan):

When practicing, one should imagine various situations […] . The attacker may grasp the wrists, clothing, neck, or other parts of the body, and one must escape from his attempt to grasp and immediately deliver a counterattack. So the point to remember is the quickness of the counterattack, which is executed almost simultaneously while escaping from the attacker's hold. […] – Escape techniques may be used against front, side, and rear grasping attacks. Attacks from the front may include such techniques as grasping the wrist, both wrists, the collar, hair or hugging, etc., and side attacks such as grasping the wrist and grasping the neck; also attacks from the rear may consist of similar techniques such as grasping the wrist, grasping the collar, hugging, etc. There may be times when several attackers may attack from both sides or from front and back. Considering all situations, always think about and practice against such attacks.

In Kyohan he also claims to have quite a thorough understanding of the tekki kata series. His suggestion for how to study kata also gives us an idea of why his students did not gain such a deep understanding:

In the past, it was expected that about three years were required to learn a single kata, and it was usual that even an expert of considerable skill would only know three or at the most five kata. Thus, in short, it was felt that a superficial understanding of many kata was of little use. The aim of training reflected the precept expressed by the words, „Although the doorway is small, go deeply inward.“ I, too studied for ten years to really learn the three Tekki forms. However, since each form has its particular good points and because there is also benefit to be gained from knowing a wide selection of forms, one might well reconsider the practice of becoming deeply engrossed in very few forms. Whereas people in earlier times made deep studies of a narrow field, people today study widely and not deeply. It is not a good idea to follow one way or the other; it is better to take the middle way. For this reason, I have employed the method of advancing students as soon as they have a good grasp of a form to the next one, up through the fifth Heian form or the third Tekki form, and of then returning to the first for renewed practice. Once a form has been learned, it must be practiced repeatedly until it can be applied in an emergency, for knowledge of just the sequence of a form in karate is useless.

Funakoshi had knowledge of vulnerable points of the human anatomy (list and brief description of vital points in Kyohan).

In his historical research "Shotokan" Henning Wittwer writes that the group of Itosu's first students consisted of at least "Yabu Kentsu, Hanashiro Chomo, Kudeken Ken'yu and Funakoshi Gichin. He [Itosu] taught them all at his home".

In the same book there is a section that lets us conclude that in Funakoshi's Shotokan school practical applications were practiced (translation by me):

[The Nakano School für the military] had been founded with the aim of training personnel for counterespionage, strategical maneuvers and propaganda. Part of that training were techniques for close quarter combat [...]. Because Funakoshi had good connections to the military they also approached his group [the Shotokan school]. [...] it is certain that Okuyama Tadao [...] finally adopted the close quarter combat training from the Shotokan at the Nakano School.

So at least the military thought that the combat related skill as trained in the Shotokan would be useful.

But not everybody who referred to their karate as "Shotokan karate" actually studied in the Shotokan (often). Many learned karate in the university clubs, and they were more focussed on the sports and workout aspects of karate. This was in vogue at the time, and Funakoshi certainly did cater to that audience to a certain degree when he tried to establish karate as a Japanese Budo.

Take care,

Marc  

muratmat
muratmat's picture

There is much confusion in general when it comes to Asato and Funakoshi. When Funakoshi wrote "Karate-do My way of life" was really old, and probably some memories were confused. Here is a list of key facts:

- Funakoshi started training karate under Asato in 1878
- In 1879 Asato received the order of the prefect of Okinawa to follow the ex Ryukyu king Sho Tai to Tokyo
- Asato returned to Okinawa from this forced exile in 1901 (the year Sho Tai died); this year coincides with the famous interview that Asato released to Funakoshi (and which was published in 1914 within the daily Ryūkyū Shinpō magazine)
- Asato died in 1906 (80 years old)

At the Funakoshi side, we have that:
- In 1979 Gichin started training under Itosu
- He continued his apprenticeship under Itosu until 1888, date that coincides with the obtaining of the diploma
- in 1888, after obtaining his diploma, Funakoshi immediately began to work in public schools as a teacher; some months later he married Gozei
- in 1889 his first child Giei born; then he had two other males (Giyu and Gigo), and two females (in 1901 Tsuru, then Uto)
- the Funakoshi apprenticeship under Itosu ended in 1889, with the marriage and the arrival of his first child

So the quote "[Azato] always sat ramrod stiff on the balcony when we worked outside" must be reconsidered in the light of historical facts.
That quote could be can probably be referred to the only learning year in 1878/1879, before Asato left Okinawa.
That "we" is probably to be understood generically as "when the training was held outside".

Oshiro Chojo (born in 1888) was the other known Asato student. Is it possible that Funakoshi has trained with Oshiro Chojo under Asato between 1902 and 1906?
Yes, but the scene seems a little surreal, a 12 years old guy who trains with a married man of 33 years (he had a wife and 5 children) under the guide of a 74 years old teacher. If true, it is likely that the only type of possible training was just the repetition of some kata...

About the "Funakoshi had knowledge of vulnerable points of the human anatomy (list and brief description of vital points in Kyohan)", it is known that chapters on vital points in Kyohan are taken form the Bubishi. By experience, to become familiar with the vital points, know how to properly identify and press them in the right way (right positions and right pressure direction) is not easy, and it takes many years of two-person practice. I still can not find satisfactory evidence that Funakoshi could have had partners in order to access to these two-person practices.

All the best,

Matteo.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

muratmat wrote:
About the "Funakoshi had knowledge of vulnerable points of the human anatomy (list and brief description of vital points in Kyohan)", it is known that chapters on vital points in Kyohan are taken form the Bubishi.

The charts in the book come from Shindo Yoshinryu Jujutsu via Hironori Otsuka. They don’t come from the Bubishi, although they are similar … as are all charts on weak-points due to the common human body. Either way, Funakoshi was certainly able to write at length about the points, but I don’t really think this takes us anywhere. It provides no evidence to support your claim. Using a chart he did not personally draw, does not prove he was a lone student for his entire career.

muratmat wrote:
I still cannot find satisfactory evidence that Funakoshi could have had partners in order to access to these two-person practices.

We've also not found any evidence that he trained alone for his entire martial career, and yet never thought to comment on it. That’s just too surreal for me. Especially in light of the information we do have that would strongly suggest otherwise.We also have all the unexplained issues raised in previous posts. As previously discussed, I feel there are much simpler and more logical ways to explain the content in Funakoshi’s books (and pretty much all other books of the time).  

You are also working on the very shaky assumption that everyone who trained under Itosu went on to become a recognisable figure in the history of karate. Surely it’s most logical to assume that the vast majority will have trained without going on to become the founder of a style or an otherwise notable figure … just like in dojos today.

I  think you’ve articulated your thinking thoroughly though and it will be up to readers to decide which viewpoint they want to adopt.

All the best,

Iain

ky0han
ky0han's picture

Hi everyone,

regarding the issue that Funakoshi was a small sickish child. I heard or read this about a lot of the old masters. They were small and sick before taking up the training and after a few years they were healthy and strong. I sense a theme here, that this was used to advertise Karate training and probably over exaggerated.

Regarding the absence of Asato Anko, it is true that he followed the Ryukyu King into his exile to Tokyo. But who said he stayed there the whole time. As far as I know Asato visited Okinawa every once in a while and when he did he of course oversaw the training of his student Funakoshi and maybe others. Like Iain wrote just because not every student made it into the history books doesn't mean there weren't any others.

Funakoshi when opening the Shotokan had private students who paid him and they certainly learned a more deeper form of Karate then the thousand of students he was teaching at the universities. I also teach at a university and I am pretty sure that he had to deal with the same kind of fluctuation I have to deal with. And you have to train a group of 50 or more students in a different way than a single individual or a rather small group you can put your whole focus on.

Regards Holger

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

ky0han wrote:
regarding the issue that Funakoshi was a small sickish child. I heard or read this about a lot of the old masters. They were small and sick before taking up the training and after a few years they were healthy and strong. I sense a theme here, that this was used to advertise Karate training and probably over exaggerated.

That’s a solid observation and, as you say, quite a few notable karateka of the time have the “sickly child” backstory attached to them. For example, the exact same thing is said about Kenwa Mabuni (founder of Shito-Ryu and another student of Itosu). It also does not follow that, even if they were genuinely sickly, that that would necessitate kata only solo-training for their entire training. And even then, the standard story is that they got strong because of their training such that the “sickness” went away.

All the best,

Iain

Chikara Andrew
Chikara Andrew's picture

There are a lot of inconsistencies in the writing of Funakoshi in particular in relation to his relationship with Azato and Itosu as described in Karete-Do My Way of Life, some of these could be attributed to the time between events and writing, however I think a lot have to do with a honorific type of writing which is prevalent in the culture.

For example in Karate-Do My Way of Life states that he wrote to Azato and Itosu after he left Okinawa for Japan in 1922 and they wrote back with letters of support... despite the fact that they had both been dead for several years, 1906 and 1915 respectively.

He attributes Azato and Itosu as equal influences in his life, and yet he spent comparatively little time with Azato compared to Itosu.

What is clear from his writings and that of others is that Funakoshi was an integral member of the "Karate" set in Okinawa in the late nineteenth century. He is exposed to a number of other teachers and likewise is involved in various groups giving demonstrations early in the 20th century. He might not have been as much a "fighter" as others, which drew him some criticism, however he obviously had a full understanding of the art including throws locks etc.

In relation to the original question one other possible point to consider is Azato's son. Funakoshi tells us that he was invited to train under Azato because of his relationship with Azato's son. It would seem unusual for Azato to train an outsider and not train his own son. Perhaps what Funakoshi meant was that he was Azato's only non-family student.

Andrew