Monat: Juli 2025

As many of you likely know, different pronunciations can correspond to different kanji, but the same pronunciation can also be written with different kanji—and thus carry different meanings. A good example of this is the word Kōdōkan.

---

Kōdōkan 講道館 – Jūdō Headquarter in Tōkyō

Meaning: “Hall for the Instruction of the Way”

• 講 (kō): lecture, instruction
• 道 (dō): way (in the sense of an ethical, philosophical, or martial path)
• 館 (kan): hall, building
  → A hall or institution where the „Way“ is transmitted through teaching and lectures.

---

Kōdōkan 興道館 – Nagamine Shōshin Dōjō in Naha (Okinawa)

Meaning: “Hall for the Advancement of the Way”

• 興 (kō): promotion, revitalization, rise, stimulation
• 道 (dō): way
• 館 (kan): hall
  → A hall for the revival or promotion of the Way – which, in the context of Matsubayashi-ryū, can be understood as a reference to the renewal or preservation of traditional martial values. The character Kō derives from the names Matsumora Kōsaku and Iha Kōtatsu.

---

Kōdōkan 光道館 – Matayoshi Shinpō Dōjō in Naha (Okinawa)

Meaning: “Hall of the Way of Light”

• 光 (kō): light, radiance
• 道 (dō): way
• 館 (kan): hall
  → A hall of the light-filled path – symbolically representing an “enlightened” or “clear” path. The character Kō comes from the name of Matayoshi Shinkō.

I believe it is no longer much of a secret that I am currently working on an article about Tō’on-ryū. I would like to share a bit of my ongoing research with you. I believe this step is both right and important.

It should also come as no surprise that I strongly prefer to work almost exclusively with Japanese sources – though I do occasionally draw on English-language materials as well. This was, of course, also the case with Tō’on-ryū.

It should be noted, however, that even in Japan, very little has been written about Tō’on-ryū – and when it has, the books are usually only available through secondhand bookshops.

Two of the most important students of Kyoda Jūhatsu wrote down their recollections, in which they sometimes provided detailed accounts of Kyoda – most notably Iraha Chōkō (1968, 1981a, 1981b) and Kanzaki Shigekazu (1999, 2003a, 2003b).

However, Murakami Katsumi and Ōnishi Eizō also wrote extensively about Kyoda in their books – Murakami was even the first to gain deeper insight through several conversations with Kyoda. But Ōnishi should not be overlooked either – he must be considered a pioneer, as he traveled to Beppu with a letter of recommendation from Tōyama Kanken, opening the door for several karateka.

Iraha Chōkō is widely regarded as Kyoda’s most important student from Okinawa. After Kyoda’s death, he was interviewed several times – among others by Koyama Masashi, who recorded the entire conversation, and by Hokama Tetsuhiro, who interviewed Iraha in 1984 and published his insights both in a book and in an article. Murakami Katsumi also had the good fortune to meet Iraha and compare his own techniques learned under Kyoda with Iraha’s.

Tokashiki Iken also made an important contribution. Although he never met Kyoda personally, he spoke with several individuals who had been close to him – including Kanzaki Shigekazu (3rd sōke of Tō’on-ryū), Kyoda Jūchoku (second son of Kyoda Jūhatsu), Shimabukuro Katsuyuki (Kyoda’s grandnephew), and Kojō Kafu (a student at the school where Kyoda taught).

These are among the most important works written in Japanese about Tō’on-ryū and Kyoda, and they have naturally all been incorporated into my article.

During an earlier conversation, a German karate researcher advised me to also include English-language sources, as they sometimes address important questions that Japanese authors often neglect.

I took this advice to heart and analyzed many English-language sources, comparing them with the Japanese ones. I came to the conclusion that many of the early English-language writings on Tō’on-ryū and Kyoda sensei are largely copies of texts by Hokama Tetsuhiro and Murakami Katsumi.

The first major Western research was carried out by Mario McKenna, who became the first Westerner to study Tō’on-ryū under Kanzaki sensei – and indeed the first to conduct an interview with a karateka from the Tō’on-ryū tradition. Naturally, McKenna also drew on the Western sources I mentioned earlier, comparing them with the Japanese materials and asking Kanzaki sensei in-depth questions based on this comparative research to advance his work further.

In addition to the two interviews McKenna published at the time, he also spoke with many other significant individuals who made important contributions to his Tō’on-ryū research. I would be very happy to read his full body of work once it is published.

All of these written sources were carefully reviewed and compared by my wife and me, and were supplemented by interviews with experts as well as with previously unpublished materials. I look forward to being able to publish my research findings soon.

Since I began publishing my research in Gekkan Hiden magazine — with heartfelt thanks at this point to Koyama sensei for connecting me with the publisher — an increasing number of reader letters have been printed. I would like to briefly introduce one of these short letters below.

To think that Inoue Kishō sensei of Ryūkyū Kobujutsu is the great-grandson of Inoue Katsunosuke—what an incredible lineage. I heard that he demonstrated nunchaku-jutsu at this year’s Kobudō demonstration. I really wish I could have seen it live. Next time, I will definitely make my way to the Nippon Budōkan. – (Ibaraki Prefecture / F.S. / 49 years old)

I am aware that I am still a relatively unknown and fairly young researcher — but words like these bring me joy every time and motivate me to continue working diligently and to further deepen my research.

I asked ChatGPT a question … and here is the answer.

An improvement in the quality of historical Karate research can be achieved on several levels – methodological, content-related, and structural. Here are the key approaches:

⸻

1. Methodological Foundation and Interdisciplinary Connection

• Historically Critical Methodology: Primary sources (e.g., old writings, diaries, eyewitness accounts) should be analyzed using the standards of historical scholarship: source criticism, contextualization, and consideration of possible bias.

• Interdisciplinarity: Involvement of fields such as ethnology, Japanese and Chinese studies, sports science, sociology, religious studies, and cultural history. This enables a deeper understanding of the cultural, political, and social contexts.

• Incorporation of Local Histories: On-site research in Okinawa, Japan, China, etc., ideally with language skills to evaluate original sources without relying on translations.

⸻

2. Access to and Processing of Primary Sources

• Preservation and Digitization of Historical Documents: Old manuscripts, training notes, newspaper articles, photographs, or video footage should be archived, digitized, and academically processed.

• Improvement of Translations: Many existing translations (e.g., of old Japanese or Chinese texts) are flawed or lack context. Careful philological work is necessary.

⸻

3. Critique of Myths and Legendary Narratives

• Deconstruction of Founding Myths: Many legends about “Master XYZ” or “the true origin of Karate” lack historical foundation. A sober analysis helps counteract romanticized or nationalistically charged narratives.

• Distinction Between History and Memory: Karate history is often also a history of memory – subjectively shaped by political or ideological interests.

⸻

4. Scholarly Exchange and Publication Standards

• Promotion of Academic Publications: Quality assurance through peer-review processes, citation standards, and open scholarly discourse.

• Support for Research in English and Japanese: Many works are published in only one language – better international exchange can help close research gaps.

• Networks and Conferences: Building international research networks, conferences, and workshops on the topic of “Martial Arts Studies.”

⸻

5. Inclusion of Living Sources (Oral History)

• Eyewitness Interviews: Former students of important masters or practitioners from the pre-war era can provide valuable information – provided it is gathered and contextualized using sound methodology.

• Documentation of the Living Heritage: That which “was never written down” must also be preserved and examined as cultural knowledge.

⸻

6. Reflection on One’s Own Research Perspective

• Self-Criticism and Transparency: Researchers should disclose their own roles and potential ideological influences – especially if they are Karate practitioners themselves.

• Distinction Between Practice and Theory: There are often discrepancies between “everyday training” and historical development that should be analyzed without falling into idealized retrospection.

⸻

Conclusion:

Historical Karate research is still in a semi-academic stage in many areas. By aligning more closely with academic standards, critically examining traditional narratives, and opening up to interdisciplinary perspectives, its quality can be significantly improved.

A new book arrived today. Shame on me, I only recently bought it.

Now it’s time to start reading 😉

I have recently begun to study linguistic dictionaries more intensively, and I will therefore also draw comparisons to the Deutsches Wörterbuch by the Brothers Grimm. What many people may not know: the Brothers Grimm did not only write fairy tales, but also worked on a dictionary—one that, during their lifetimes, only reached the letter F and was not completed until 1961.

Oxford University also decided to publish a dictionary intended to cover the entire English language and to provide well-founded descriptions of its words.

What is evident in both of these monumental works: their completion took decades—and both were only finished after the deaths of their original initiators.

I recently acquired the final volume of the Great Japanese-German Dictionary—a work that likewise took decades to complete and was also the result of a collaborative effort.

Now to my actual topic:

Is it possible to compile a truly significant dictionary on Karate?

Yes, I’m aware that Karate dictionaries already exist.

But: can the existing works really be compared to the three examples mentioned above?

Such a dictionary should aim to explore all Karate styles down to the smallest detail. This would include reading every available Karate book in its original language. Naturally, the starting point should be the works published before the Second World War—for example, the books by Funakoshi, Motobu, and Mabuni, to name just a few.

Newspapers from that era should also be taken into account—again, in the original language. However, one must be aware that newspapers from that time often contained incorrect kanji, so a strong command of the Japanese language is absolutely essential.

In addition, numerous other works from Japanese and Okinawan literature would need to be considered.

The next step would be to write each word on an index card, noting who first used it in written form.

For example: when was the word “Atifa” first recorded in writing?

One of the rarer words in this context is “Yakaa”—a term that appears in the Sai-Kata Yakaa no Sai. It was Motobu Naoki Sensei who first explained the meaning of the word Yakaa to a broader audience in 2015. (https://www.facebook.com/share/16kVzYzU4x/?mibextid=wwXIfr)

Such an approach would be necessary for every word, including precise sources and clearly defined meanings.

It would therefore be a tremendous project…