Suna Uke 砂 受

Receiving sand?

My introduction to practicing Kobudo was instruction in bo basics and Choun no Kon kata. Right from the get-go I was troubled by the definition of some of the movements. Perhaps having been athletic all my life, having practiced karate for a few years and being an engineer gave me an unusual perspective. In particular it struck me that Suna Uke, which was defined as "throwing sand", was unlikely to work well given the length and geometry (cross section) of a bo. So I went out and tried it. It does not work well. You can get a few grains of sand to an opponents eye level, but only at an unrealistic distance (due to the arc-length of the bo). So I practiced diligently for years and retried it periodically; it didn't get any better. When I finally got the nerve to ask if the instructor had ever tried this with sand, I was told no. So I asked several other experienced practitioners and they had never actually tried it with sand either. (In contrast, you can easily put a good sized glob of sand exactly where you want it with an eku, though I didn't try that until many years later.) So what might this actually be?

Suna Uke occurs only once in Choun no Kon, at the end, and is followed directly by a thrusting attack, so it must be defensive. It must come up to thwart an attack and end relatively close to the attacker if the following thrust is to be effective. That's an interesting dynamic, coming up, under an attack. What might that encounter? A hand perhaps?

So I implore you, try this out. Throw the sand. Come up to meet the attack and deflect the bo (be careful for hands). And let me know what you think.

Uke?

I don't like the term "block" (though I use it frequently out of habit) because it, typically, has non-dynamic connotations. The typical, middle-of-the-bo "block" presented in kobudo is an example. It's punctuated and sets-up a race where the opponent has a slight advantage, either through seeing it coming and reversing early or rebound of energy once contact is made. The need for near-perfect perpendicularity to the attack (if you don't want to get your fingers whacked) is another consideration. The typical presentation geometry, between attacker and defender, does not give the defender an advantage, hence the race. Ideally, I would like my defense to garner me some advantage.

What if the defensive technique (initial contact with the opponent) happens much earlier than the middle-of-the-bo posture? What if the back end of the bo receives the attack and the typical, middle-posture is just the follow through? Now the defender has an advantage, the opponents fingers or hand gets whacked and the follow-through impedes the opponents use of the back end of his bo. (Consider this applied to the sequences of Choun no Kon.)

Folks talk about uke as "receiving" because of the disruptive collision that the term "blocking" typically implies. Uke is smooth and flowing, enveloping and deceptive. Blocking is banging and crashing. Granted this is just a terminological difference that could be meaningless were it not for the common practice. I have traveled some and trained in all the places I have been.  The most common, though not exclusive, presentation of "blocking" is banging and crashing into the opponents attack, absorbing and deflecting is not the typical mode that accompanies the terminology of "blocking". It is also mostly presented, both physically and verbally, in a punctuated nature. You "block" then you do "X" (something else) and the two are separate entities. In Goju we talk about receiving and controlling, which is one continuous motion. I think that the same dynamic can be applied to kobudo kata.

No Gaps!

What constitutes dynamic performance of kata? I suspect that most practitioners would say that their kata performance is dynamic. I certainly always would have, but, from my current perspective, my older modes of practice weren't what I would now consider unpunctuated (dynamic). It's not that I wasn't trying, it's just that after so many years of practice, the engrained neural-physiology is deceptive. My instructor is fond of saying, "no gaps." Hindsight is always clearer isn't it. If we apply dynamism to Choun no Kon we might get something as below to consider.

The second sequence of Choun no Kon starts with a a block, followed by four strikes (the last a thrust) and a finishing rip.

The third begins with that double-down from the opening, but done to the side. Again I would suggest reaching and taking the opponent down (this time by stepping back). Then follow in and down; strike, block or strike; strike; extend; follow and finish.

The forth sequence; block, swing, hit, block or hit, hit, thrust, take down and skewer.

The last sequence; block, thrust, rip.

Yes, the sequences might be strung-together a bit differently, but not grossly so. There is some wiggle room for where the beginnings and ends are, but the kata is not an assemblage of individual techniques that can be piced together in any way. Not that pieces can't be extracted and used separately, but that was not the original intent.The kata was made to transmit specific sequences.