Taira's teaching was very eclectic and individually centered. He did teach a basic set of Kamae and nigirikata (gripping techniques) for the bo, but not in any sequential or organized manner (you can see these basics in Taira's reprinted 1966 "Ryukyu Kobudo Taikan") as far as I know. The remainder of the weapoons seemed to be kata based. Much like karate, the drilling in kobudo kata was continuous. There were no organized two man sets per se. Just adpating technique from the kata to form your own sets.
At any rate, not surprisingly, after Taira's death all his main students (Akamine, Nakamoto, Inoue, Minowa, etc.) seemed to develop their own series of fundamental techniques, two man sets and kata bunkai for the weapons of Taira's system. Speaking for myself, when I learned from Minowa sensei, he never taught me an overt set of kihon for each weapon. Instead I was just drilled in the fundamental kata and when a certain level of proficiency was acheived, I was
introduced to two man sets and bunkai - which he had made. I do not know if this was the best way to teach, but it was how he instructed people.
I believe that Taira, like many other seniors before him (Funakoshi, Mabuni, Miyagi, etc.) developed a system, that once mastered would allow one freedom of movement and expression of technique. Unfortunately, most (if not all) modern interpretations of Taira's system have become rather static and linear. This is partly the blame of Taira himself, but also of his students.
I feel that Ryukyu Kobudo in and of itself is a unique tradition. I would go so far as to say that each weapon and each weapon kata is a tradition and system onto itself. Given the massive size of Taira's syllabus (and of other Kobudo schools) it is almost ridiculous to consider mastering but one, possibly two, weapons in the entire system. Combine this with full-time study in the empty-hand methods, and it is truly a daunting task. But it is a task that some of us, none the less, eagerly pursue.
At any rate, not surprisingly, after Taira's death all his main students (Akamine, Nakamoto, Inoue, Minowa, etc.) seemed to develop their own series of fundamental techniques, two man sets and kata bunkai for the weapons of Taira's system. Speaking for myself, when I learned from Minowa sensei, he never taught me an overt set of kihon for each weapon. Instead I was just drilled in the fundamental kata and when a certain level of proficiency was acheived, I was
introduced to two man sets and bunkai - which he had made. I do not know if this was the best way to teach, but it was how he instructed people.
I believe that Taira, like many other seniors before him (Funakoshi, Mabuni, Miyagi, etc.) developed a system, that once mastered would allow one freedom of movement and expression of technique. Unfortunately, most (if not all) modern interpretations of Taira's system have become rather static and linear. This is partly the blame of Taira himself, but also of his students.
I feel that Ryukyu Kobudo in and of itself is a unique tradition. I would go so far as to say that each weapon and each weapon kata is a tradition and system onto itself. Given the massive size of Taira's syllabus (and of other Kobudo schools) it is almost ridiculous to consider mastering but one, possibly two, weapons in the entire system. Combine this with full-time study in the empty-hand methods, and it is truly a daunting task. But it is a task that some of us, none the less, eagerly pursue.
Posts
