What came first....the bunkai or the kata

[jaymac]

Didn't actually mean to quote Nothingsshadow. I was replying to Makushi.

[swdw]

What came first....the bunkai or the kata

Yes

[Boudicca]

There are some very "successful" and highly regarded schools in the NW that don't teach any bunkai until after the shodan level. One school in particular does especially well in kata competitions even on the international level. However, the students don't know or practice the bunkai.

I don't know if you're talking about MY school, but I have a suspicion that if not, my school would fit your description.

We don't learn bunkai, and are DISCOURAGED from learning bunkai to katas at an early level. However, you would have to sit in on a class and realize what we learn INSTEAD. While our school has a fabulous reputation in kata competitions, it also does well in kumite.

Karate is about much, MUCH more than lethal techniques. Teaching lethal techniques to hachikyu isn't going to accomplish much. But teaching them about body mechanics will yield huge rewards as they progress.

We are even taught that the actual techniques in kata aren't very important. We constantly change the kata from one technique to another, and then two years later, we change it back. But we are never taught that one technique is superior to the other, just "we're doing it this way now". That is because kata is about learning how to move your own body for maximum power in ANY technique.

We do other kihon drills for more practical fighting techniques; ippon kumite, etc.

In other words, to teach bunkai with the kata at an early stage or not is a philosophical choice on the part of the teacher. Both have different results in the type of karateka they produce, but I would really look at the black belts each philosophy produces to determine "better" or "worse" philosophy, rather than merely making a judgement call based off of what is known and familiar.

[jaymac]

You know there are times when I am working kata with a student and they just arent' executing the technique quite right. Several times I have said " ok, now this is what you are doing here or what you are defending against." Almost everytime, the student replies with "oh, i get it now" It is just an insight to kata. Everyone will have different bunkai to a certain kata move and that is ok. It is just learning more about a kata than just performing a series of prearranged movements. It doesn't make one school better or worse than the other if they do or don't teach bun kai. It just depends on the individual learning the kata. Personally, I like the bun kai. When you do a kata over and over and over, you can see what you are defending against. I want the person that I am teaching to love to do kata. Sometimes bunkai helps.

[Makushi]

Karate is about much, MUCH more than lethal techniques. Teaching lethal techniques to hachikyu isn't going to accomplish much. But teaching them about body mechanics will yield huge rewards as they progress.

I do agree that body mechanics are important. But, at its heart, Karate is an art or method of self-defense. The "do" aspects of character development is only a relatively new addition to Karate, and was preceded by the kata and bunkai which is the true core of Karate and seperates it from the other "dos".

As a method of self-defense, it would seem to me that instruction in the defensive techniques, IE the bunkai, would be an important part of any serious course of study. To not teach the bunkai for several years is to deprive the student of the real tools of the trade and, at the same, misses out on the importance of visualizing the bunkai while doing the Kata.

We are even taught that the actual techniques in kata aren't very important. We constantly change the kata from one technique to another, and then two years later, we change it back.

Are you saying that you change the kata, or just the suggested bunkai for a particular section of a kata?

We do other kihon drills for more practical fighting techniques; ippon kumite, etc.

I don't see how kihon or ippon kumite practice equates to "practical fighting technique". For one, kihon is simply basics without a partner.

Ippon kumite, as is typically practiced, doesn't involve realistic or practical attacks. It inolves a person in zenkutsu dachi stepping forward in an launching either a straight punch, reverse punch, or some type of kick. None of these are realistic attacks, and therefore the defense utilized cannot be considered practical.

A more practical approach would deal with grabs, chokes, kicks, and other situations that one would face in a true self-defense scenario. That is where the true value of the bunkai can be seen.

Remember, self defense has very little to do with the point kumite that we see at tournaments. It has much more to do with preventing and or dealing with realistic attacks in a decisive manner.

Both have different results in the type of karateka they produce, but I would really look at the black belts each philosophy produces to determine "better" or "worse" philosophy, rather than merely making a judgement call based off of what is known and familiar.

I might actually agree with you on this. It might possibly be that we are talking about two different paths to the same destination.

Edited April 20, 2006 by Makushi

[GrrrArg]

I'd say its the principles which come first. The kata expresses the principles and the bunkai show examples of the principles in action.

Mike

By god mike - you get around these forums almost as much as me

Bunkai - is a process, a process of breaking down and exploring various parts of your Kata. Including various Applications (Oyo).

Id say the two are intermingled and maybe inseperable in an ideal world.

As Mike suggests, and others have alluded too, I believe its the principles behind what we are learning that are most important.