A Bunkai revolution?

[Skeptic 2004]

If you read some more of my posts or in between the lines, you would see that I arrogantly consider myself one of the lucky few who have an instructor that does so.

Amen, brother.

I wrote a pretty convoluted article more than a year ago on this same subject (and if you want to read it, let me know and I'll point you to the right link), but what it boils down to is along the lines of what Shorin Ryuu has been saying: sometimes a punch is just a punch, a kick just a kick, and a block just a block. Unfortunately, people do not train these techniques well enough to perform them with the requisite destructive power and technique to make them effective. As a result, we have a host of "creative" meanings; "Gee...my punch just doesn't feel strong enough...maybe this isn't a punch...maybe it's supposed to be a throw. Hey! That's it."

I think individuals who are searching for meaning in kata should go back to basics and really examine the science of their movements. Take the punch for example. How are you punching? Are you just flinging a fist out there? How does your body begin to move the moment your hand moves? What is your posture? How are you breathing? Where is your weight? How much pressure do you exert at your feet? In your calves? In your thighs? When do you start to move koshi? How do you put in hara? How tight are your tendons in the forearm? Which knuckle do you use to strike? At what point do you kime? How far is the kikomi? What is your timing?

These are just a fraction of the questions one should ask as they do kata, and these only cover one technique - a punch. These questions must be answered precisely; my toe being a fraction of an inch off during execution can literally mean the difference between an effective, destructive punch and a strike with half that power.

When an individual understands the execution of technique to that level of detail and strives to perform at that level, a simple meaning in a kata such as a punch-kick-block sequence is effective and destructive to your opponent. If you don't understand the science behind your movement, you will either execute a movement wrongly or assign a wrong meaning to that movement: both meaning and execution are degraded as a result.

Err...enough rambling

*goes back to the nowhere that he came from*

[Shorin Ryuu]

Welcome back, Skeptic 2004.

[Zanshin]

I think individuals who are searching for meaning in kata should go back to basics and really examine the science of their movements. Take the punch for example. How are you punching? Are you just flinging a fist out there? How does your body begin to move the moment your hand moves? What is your posture? How are you breathing? Where is your weight? How much pressure do you exert at your feet? In your calves? In your thighs? When do you start to move koshi? How do you put in hara? How tight are your tendons in the forearm? Which knuckle do you use to strike? At what point do you kime? How far is the kikomi? What is your timing?

Spot on in my opinion.

I practice kata primarily to learn good form, and I practice Kumite (ippon, ohyo, kihon, jiyu etc.) in order to learn how to apply the techniques. In this way Kata and Kumite compliment each other.

I appreciate that ultimately, all kumite techniques have been extrapolated from kata, however, I think that using kata as a way to try to interpret individual combat scenarios is wrong.

To me, kata has a greater value in terms of applying the principles of movement; the key fundamental required to be a good fighter.

[GOM]

I agree Skeptic.

There are far too many people running around now making up thousands of applications for modern moves in a modern kata without looking back to an earlier version of a kata where you can see a punch is a punch, a kick is a kick, a block is a block.

Take Bassai (dai) for example. The opening move found in most modern versions looks like a wrist escape. In an earlier version (Oyadamori Passai) you can see quite easily that it is a jodan block and jodan punch. The feet positions in the Oyadamori Passai indicate that the next move is a hip throw. But without looking back at an earlier version, the modern practitioner comes to the conlusion that it is a wrist lock.

[swdw]

I agree Skeptic.

There are far too many people running around now making up thousands of applications for modern moves in a modern kata without looking back to an earlier version of a kata where you can see a punch is a punch, a kick is a kick, a block is a block.

Take Bassai (dai) for example. The opening move found in most modern versions looks like a wrist escape. In an earlier version (Oyadamori Passai) you can see quite easily that it is a jodan block and jodan punch. The feet positions in the Oyadamori Passai indicate that the next move is a hip throw. But without looking back at an earlier version, the modern practitioner comes to the conlusion that it is a wrist lock.

Sigh, but when there is a need to use it as an escape wouldn't it be nice to know?

It's funny that Toguchi talks about an Okinawan term called "Kaisai no genri" or the research of the applications in kata. Funny that these were also discussed in articles by Miyagi called "Karate-do Gairyaku" and "Goju-Ryu Kempo".

I guess because of my Goju background I tend to look at this differently. We have very old school traditional bunkai that are escapes, takedowns, joint locks and so on. No, these are not modern "made up" bunkai, but applications taught prior to WWII. Both Goju Sensei's I have the privilige to train with (one my senssei, the other his friend) spent 15 or more years total in Okinawa in the 60's and 70's and have met and trained under the likes of Seiko Higa, Eiichi Miyazato, Meitoku Yagi, and others. So I doubt their bunkai are "modern versions".

Yes a kick is a kick, a punch is a punch, a block is a block, but what help are they when someone grabs you from behind if you don't also know escapes or counters for such a situation? Wouldn't it be better to find where your art addresses such situations?

To me, kata has a greater value in terms of applying the principles of movement; the key fundamental required to be a good fighter.

And as for the separation between kumite and kata, you might as well take up boxing. All the pad work, bag work, and drills teach you the fundamentals of movement without having to memorize all those strange movements.

And if that is all kata is to be used for, then the 3 main principles for researching kata -"shuyo san gensoku", and the supplemental principles "hosoku joko" are not of much use and shouldn't even exist.

This also raises the question: Why are there drawings in the Bubishi showing techniques other than punches and kicks from body positions that can easily be used as either?

Anyway, that's my 2 cents.

[Shorin Ryuu]

We never said there was no grappling in karate. We're saying that the exaggerated emphasis on grappling or complicated manuevers tends to be the result of an inability to strike, block or kick with devastating power. Continuing this overemphasis on grappling in karate will only prolong this problem.

[pers]

Bunkai has palyed a big part in my training over the years .

Our class was arranged around the bunkai of the kata that we were working on on that particular period .

the class started with techniques relevant to that kata and bunkai and later on after demonstartion by our sensei we did it as pair work ,this way when performing the kata we had more idea of what we are doing ,and over the time it had a lot of benefit .

[GOM]

We never said there was no grappling in karate. We're saying that the exaggerated emphasis on grappling or complicated manuevers tends to be the result of an inability to strike, block or kick with devastating power. Continuing this overemphasis on grappling in karate will only prolong this problem.

Yes, exactly.

There was certainly grappling and that shouldn't be ignored when practising/teaching karate. But, as Shorin Ryu also states, lately the emphasis has been on the excessive use of joint locks when a strike would have been more sufficient. And a lack of practising said strikes has led modern karate to become weak.

And then of course there was a major focus on pressure point striking in the 90's that made a lot of karate teachers try to include them where they thought it was appropriate. Again, they came up with the same problems. Round hole, square peg.

[Mike Flanagan]

A karateka learns about joint-locks. He gets over-excited and sees them everywhere he looks.

A karateka learns about kyusho. He gets over-excited and sees them everywhere he looks.

A karateka learns about throws. He gets over-excited and sees them everywhere he looks.

None of that means these things don't exist in kata or in karate. Over time the karateka learns to see them in the appropriate context. They're not everything there is to know about karate, but they are a significant part.

Interesting point about the opening of Oyadamori Passai. However, it should also be remembered that this is just one of many versions of Passai. I have a thick ring binder full to the brim of old versions of this kata. Even the Tomari Oyadamori version shown does not do the obvious jodan block and punch that GOM describes. I'm not saying that version is not valid, simply that it is one of many. Looking at this technique across the different versions it is clear that the people who modified the kata had many different things in mind. It seems likely that even they did not all agree with each other. But it is also obvious that there are many possible applications. What it really boils down to IMO is whether you can make your version work against realistic attacks.

Mike

[GOM]

What it really boils down to IMO is whether you can make your version work against realistic attacks.

Mike

Or better yet, would you use it.