Ancient Martial Arts resurrected?

[MatsuShinshii]

I may have gotten this wrong. It seems the general consent in this forum is that, Ancient Martial Arts was brutal in nature which is true.

Ancient martial arts or Koryu arts were brutal in nature. All MA are brutal in nature. In Karate for example, the Okinawan's did not practice this art as it is practiced today. When Japan got a hold of the art they transformed it to be a peaceful art or "Do". They removed the dangerous elements so as to dumb it down for the general public and for school children. The primary purpose was to make their youth stronger after observing the physical fitness of the Okinawan Karateka. Today it has in some arts been degraded from it's original intent even further and made into a sport and in some cases little more than an after school kindercare for children.

However there are some arts that still keep to the traditional teachings. I guess it really depends on what you consider brutal.

When I started it was not uncommon to leave the Dojo with a few bruises and occasional broken nose, finger jamb, etc. etc. Was it brutal? Depends on your perspective! I did not think so but then again I grew up in a different time than the kids of today. However the question must be asked... if traditional training was so unsafe, explain MMA.

I guess afterwards martial arts became toned down for safety reasons and that's why Kata and forms exists.

I have to correct you here. Kata does not exist to "tone down" anything. Without Kata, Quan, forms (whatever your art calls them) you would not have Martial arts.

This is the problem with the knowledge that is passed down to students today. The masters of old learned how to fight through the Kata. It was not a dance or a way to tone anything down. The dangerous elements that were removed by the Japanese are contained within the Kata. The Kata is the path to self defense. In fact the Kata and their predecessors, Quan, are the combat techniques that were learned on the battle field and neatly packed into a way to remember them and to pass them down. This is Kata.

Today's instructors and schools have removed the techniques and practice them separately from the Kata. The Kihon that most practice all in a line come directly from the Kata. The self defense "Torite/Tuite" that is practiced as a stand alone element comes directly from the Kata. The grappling "Tegumi" comes from the Kata. Kumite and it's techniques come from the Kata. Without Kata you have no art and you have no structure for the combative elements of the art.

[gunner]

Thanks for the post MutsuShinshil. That aligns pretty much with what I've been reading. I wonder where the "dangerous" elements of kata can be found? From what I've read, the old Okinawan masters never wrote down their methods. They were passed down from master to student directly. Do any of the Grand Masters in Okinawa still know these techniques or are the lost to time?

[MatsuShinshii]

Thanks for the post MutsuShinshil. That aligns pretty much with what I've been reading. I wonder where the "dangerous" elements of kata can be found? From what I've read, the old Okinawan masters never wrote down their methods. They were passed down from master to student directly. Do any of the Grand Masters in Okinawa still know these techniques or are the lost to time?

They are contained within the Bunkai. They are not lost. Granted a lot of "modern" day schools have turned away from Kata as a means of teaching Deshi how to fight and thus have lost the original intent or the Bunkai. However there are still arts that still teach the old ways and have maintained the original techniques and still teach the original Bunkai or at least most of them.

Having said that even strict styles have lost some of the original founders intent. My art traces directly back to Matsumura "Bushi" Sokon and was not changed by the Japanese as Hohan Soken did not join the Japanese organizations or subscribe to the Japanese methods so you would think that it is pure. This is not entirely the case. It is traditional for each Shinshii to put there little twist on the art and even go as far as to rename it as a way of claiming the art under their rule. Having said this the way a punch is executed differs from teacher to teacher on the lesser end of change. Kata and the translation of its techniques is on the higher end of change and has a greater impact on the art itself.

There are four instructors between me and the founder. If each tweaked the art that is, at minimal, four small changes. If as I said the translation of Kata or the way it is performed was "tweaked", that is a very large change from the original intent.

This I found was the case with about 30% of our Bunkai.

This is not the end of the world as I discovered as a Shodan. I was and still am a huge history buff. I sought out instructors of the Chinese styles that history told us made up our art. I was not entirely successful but managed to find a few over the years and was able to learn the original quan that contributed to our Kata in some cases and in others learn the actual Quan that our Kata was name after.

By learning the techniques and applications (Bunkai) of the original Quan, I was able to see that we stayed pretty firm to the original intent except for a small percentage of cases. These changes I think are attributed to each of the instructors that took over the art when the instructor who proceeded them passed it down or passed away. They may have favored a version that differed from the one they were taught and incorporated it.

This is not a bad thing either since this gives us as Karateka more ways to implement these applications and gives us more responses and choices when attacked.

Having said all of this, I do have a point. To get right to it... you do not necessarily have to be studying under an old school style or teacher to discover the hidden applications of your art. There are an absolute myriad of ways to research your style and what contributed to it. The internet, be somewhat cautious as to the information, is a fantastic place to research and even find instructors that teach the original Quan Fa that your art has evolved from.

The missing link that you will not find in the Chinese origins is Ti/Di or if your prefer Japanese Te or De. The original Okinawan fighting art which is the foundation of Karate. However this to can be found with a little research.

If your style teaches Torite (Tuite), Tegumi and Kyusho you have the first step in unlocking the "hidden" meaning of your Kata. Finding the original applications of these techniques found within the Kata, again can be found with research. The Bubishi is an excellent starting point as well as researching your art and find out what Chinese influences there were.

Once you have discovered these Quan Fa you can then find instructors to talk to or you can watch Youtube video's, again be cautious and discriminating as anyone can post a video and claim anything. With the internet you can also research those that have already done the research and buy their books or even contact them directly and they may point you in the right direction. If you're art is Suidi (Shuri-Te) based, I could probably answer a lot of your questions or even point you in the right direction if you practice a Kata I am not familiar with.

The point is these techniques and applications are far from gone. Most traditional teachers pass these down to their Deshi, albeit it may not be passed down until one reaches a specified rank, they are still passed down.

The real problem is those arts/instructors that think as though they are a first learning the Kata as a Deshi and question why they are learning this when in their mind it will not help them defend themselves. This is because their instructor never passed this knowledge down to them and they did not learn their Kata's Bunkai.

And yes the instructors in Okinawa still know and teach the Bunkai.

My main art teaches us Bunkai as we learn the Kata. We do not have to worry about the ramifications of teaching children these techniques as we do not teach kids.

I studied Matsubayashi Ryu years ago to broaden my knowledge base and found that they do not teach Bunkai until you reach the Yudansha level. I never reached that level due to a busier schedule in life.

My point is your art may teach it but it may be reserved for higher ranks.

The best person to ask is your teacher. If they do not know, ask your teachers teacher and so on. If you are studying Okinawan Karate someone in your lineage knows these techniques and applications. They may have removed them for reasons they only know.

Good luck and let me know if I can be of any help. I don't know if I can answer all your questions but if your of Suidi lineage I may be able to answer most.

[bushido_man96]

Without Kata, Quan, forms (whatever your art calls them) you would not have Martial arts.

Without Kata you have no art and you have no structure for the combative elements of the art.

I disagree here. I don't think kata is a requirement or prerequisite for a Martial Art. There are many Eastern styles that do train kata, but I don't think the lack thereof means there is no Martial Art.

[MatsuShinshii]

Without Kata, Quan, forms (whatever your art calls them) you would not have Martial arts.

Without Kata you have no art and you have no structure for the combative elements of the art.

I disagree here. I don't think kata is a requirement or prerequisite for a Martial Art. There are many Eastern styles that do train kata, but I don't think the lack thereof means there is no Martial Art.

I understand your point of view but I must point out that without Kata, which was and still is the delivery system for passing down the art, you would not have Karate.

I understand that some arts are not passed down via Kata, Quan or even set routines.

I guess my statement should have been there would be no Karate/Gung Fu without Kata/Quan.

My point in fact is arts (lets take some modern day Karate styles) that do not teach Kata or only show their students Kata but do not explain what it is and how to extract the true intent of the art, but instead focus on Kihon (individual techniques such as blocks, strikes and kicks) and Kumite are not passing on the art but only a portion of it. Yes the argument can be made that one can learn the fundamentals through these practices but I argue that they are missing the true intent and the reason they are doing what they are doing. Kihon can only teach so much. Kumite without the foundation and understanding of the applications and how to utilize them will only teach so much. It is the Kata, and what they can and do teach us, that fills in the blanks and shows us what these other practices fall short of.

I understand where you are coming from but you show me a Karateka that does not train in Kata and I'll show you a Karateka that fails to have a true understanding in the art. I'll go one step further and say I can show you a Karateka that is lacking in skills and knowledge of all of the applications and weapons available to him. Without Kata you can not IMHO truly have a firm grasp on the art.

IMHO I will even go as far as to say without a true understanding of the Kata, one has no chance of mastering the art.

This may not be popular with some modern day styles/schools but I have trained with some of these instructors and IMO they are lacking to say the least. Yes they can execute a perfect front snap kick or a back hand but are missing the glue that ties all of these techniques together and gives a broad understanding how to utilize them and when.

Kata is like a book and Kihon are some of the individual sentences that make up the book. You have an understanding of what the sentence means but without reading the entire book they are pointless. Not to mention that you totally miss the other sentences such as the "hidden" techniques (Ti, Quan Fa, Torite, Tegumi and Kyusho) that are not readily apparent.

Without knowing the order of the sentences the book makes no sense. Do you have an understanding of the individual sentences? Yes. Do you fully understand the art as a whole? No you do not.

[Himokiri Karate]

Without Kata, Quan, forms (whatever your art calls them) you would not have Martial arts.

Without Kata you have no art and you have no structure for the combative elements of the art.

I disagree here. I don't think kata is a requirement or prerequisite for a Martial Art. There are many Eastern styles that do train kata, but I don't think the lack thereof means there is no Martial Art.

I understand your point of view but I must point out that without Kata, which was and still is the delivery system for passing down the art, you would not have Karate.

I understand that some arts are not passed down via Kata, Quan or even set routines.

I guess my statement should have been there would be no Karate/Gung Fu without Kata/Quan.

My point in fact is arts (lets take some modern day Karate styles) that do not teach Kata or only show their students Kata but do not explain what it is and how to extract the true intent of the art, but instead focus on Kihon (individual techniques such as blocks, strikes and kicks) and Kumite are not passing on the art but only a portion of it. Yes the argument can be made that one can learn the fundamentals through these practices but I argue that they are missing the true intent and the reason they are doing what they are doing. Kihon can only teach so much. Kumite without the foundation and understanding of the applications and how to utilize them will only teach so much. It is the Kata, and what they can and do teach us, that fills in the blanks and shows us what these other practices fall short of.

I understand where you are coming from but you show me a Karateka that does not train in Kata and I'll show you a Karateka that fails to have a true understanding in the art. I'll go one step further and say I can show you a Karateka that is lacking in skills and knowledge of all of the applications and weapons available to him. Without Kata you can not IMHO truly have a firm grasp on the art.

IMHO I will even go as far as to say without a true understanding of the Kata, one has no chance of mastering the art.

This may not be popular with some modern day styles/schools but I have trained with some of these instructors and IMO they are lacking to say the least. Yes they can execute a perfect front snap kick or a back hand but are missing the glue that ties all of these techniques together and gives a broad understanding how to utilize them and when.

Kata is like a book and Kihon are some of the individual sentences that make up the book. You have an understanding of what the sentence means but without reading the entire book they are pointless. Not to mention that you totally miss the other sentences such as the "hidden" techniques (Ti, Quan Fa, Torite, Tegumi and Kyusho) that are not readily apparent.

Without knowing the order of the sentences the book makes no sense. Do you have an understanding of the individual sentences? Yes. Do you fully understand the art as a whole? No you do not.

You are using the "no true Scotsman" informal fallacy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Reality is, there is many ways to have that eureka/light bulb moment and kata is one of them but...its not the only way!

[MatsuShinshii]

Without Kata, Quan, forms (whatever your art calls them) you would not have Martial arts.

Without Kata you have no art and you have no structure for the combative elements of the art.

I disagree here. I don't think kata is a requirement or prerequisite for a Martial Art. There are many Eastern styles that do train kata, but I don't think the lack thereof means there is no Martial Art.

I understand your point of view but I must point out that without Kata, which was and still is the delivery system for passing down the art, you would not have Karate.

I understand that some arts are not passed down via Kata, Quan or even set routines.

I guess my statement should have been there would be no Karate/Gung Fu without Kata/Quan.

My point in fact is arts (lets take some modern day Karate styles) that do not teach Kata or only show their students Kata but do not explain what it is and how to extract the true intent of the art, but instead focus on Kihon (individual techniques such as blocks, strikes and kicks) and Kumite are not passing on the art but only a portion of it. Yes the argument can be made that one can learn the fundamentals through these practices but I argue that they are missing the true intent and the reason they are doing what they are doing. Kihon can only teach so much. Kumite without the foundation and understanding of the applications and how to utilize them will only teach so much. It is the Kata, and what they can and do teach us, that fills in the blanks and shows us what these other practices fall short of.

I understand where you are coming from but you show me a Karateka that does not train in Kata and I'll show you a Karateka that fails to have a true understanding in the art. I'll go one step further and say I can show you a Karateka that is lacking in skills and knowledge of all of the applications and weapons available to him. Without Kata you can not IMHO truly have a firm grasp on the art.

IMHO I will even go as far as to say without a true understanding of the Kata, one has no chance of mastering the art.

This may not be popular with some modern day styles/schools but I have trained with some of these instructors and IMO they are lacking to say the least. Yes they can execute a perfect front snap kick or a back hand but are missing the glue that ties all of these techniques together and gives a broad understanding how to utilize them and when.

Kata is like a book and Kihon are some of the individual sentences that make up the book. You have an understanding of what the sentence means but without reading the entire book they are pointless. Not to mention that you totally miss the other sentences such as the "hidden" techniques (Ti, Quan Fa, Torite, Tegumi and Kyusho) that are not readily apparent.

Without knowing the order of the sentences the book makes no sense. Do you have an understanding of the individual sentences? Yes. Do you fully understand the art as a whole? No you do not.

You are using the "no true Scotsman" informal fallacy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Reality is, there is many ways to have that eureka/light bulb moment and kata is one of them but...its not the only way!

With all due respect to your point of view I stand with my statement and believe it to be true. I am sure there are plenty of ways to have a eureka moment but I am talking about understanding the art that the founder created through his training and insights. I am not sure how a eureka moment makes sense in the context of my statement. Yes we as Karateka need to discover our own way but if you are not first shown the original intent you have no foundation to build from.

Again I repeat my original statement, "if you do not understand Kata which is where the entire art is derived, you do not understand the art itself. 20 eureka moments do not add up to 1000's of proven applications.

Again with all due respect I stand on my original statement based on my years of training in both traditional, Koryu and Modern day Karate styles.

If you have a valid counter point that I have not experienced please share it as I do not claim to be an expert but merely passing on what my experiences have taught me.

[Kusotare]

Something to consider on the subject of Kata and how they relate to Koryu arts...

When referring to 'Koryu', it is generally accepted it pertains to (mainland) Japanese martial systems that were founded prior to the Meiji restoration.

To be pedantic, strictly speaking, there is no such thing as a karate 'Koryu' although some make an interesting case for Goju-ryu.

Interestingly however most of the Japanese Koryu use a different kanji for the word kata to that used by Okinawan karate.

Typically most Okinawan karate utilise the kanji 型 (Kei).

Whereas Japanese Koryu use 形 (Gyou).

They both read as Kata but the meanings vary slightly (but enough to be important to understand why).

In a nutshell, the Okinawan reading of kata 型 (Kei) comes to represent a template or prototype, whereas the Japanese 形 (Gyou) means form or shape (it is found the Japanese word for a wooden doll 'ningyou' which means human form).

These are important distinctions in terms of the pedagogical approach between the two.

Okinwan karate kata are used as a way to generate possibilities and variations, whereas the Japanese approach is to use the kata to develop good focus, form strength and principles of movement - augmented with paired kata.

K.

[Himokiri Karate]

Without Kata, Quan, forms (whatever your art calls them) you would not have Martial arts.

Without Kata you have no art and you have no structure for the combative elements of the art.

I disagree here. I don't think kata is a requirement or prerequisite for a Martial Art. There are many Eastern styles that do train kata, but I don't think the lack thereof means there is no Martial Art.

I understand your point of view but I must point out that without Kata, which was and still is the delivery system for passing down the art, you would not have Karate.

I understand that some arts are not passed down via Kata, Quan or even set routines.

I guess my statement should have been there would be no Karate/Gung Fu without Kata/Quan.

My point in fact is arts (lets take some modern day Karate styles) that do not teach Kata or only show their students Kata but do not explain what it is and how to extract the true intent of the art, but instead focus on Kihon (individual techniques such as blocks, strikes and kicks) and Kumite are not passing on the art but only a portion of it. Yes the argument can be made that one can learn the fundamentals through these practices but I argue that they are missing the true intent and the reason they are doing what they are doing. Kihon can only teach so much. Kumite without the foundation and understanding of the applications and how to utilize them will only teach so much. It is the Kata, and what they can and do teach us, that fills in the blanks and shows us what these other practices fall short of.

I understand where you are coming from but you show me a Karateka that does not train in Kata and I'll show you a Karateka that fails to have a true understanding in the art. I'll go one step further and say I can show you a Karateka that is lacking in skills and knowledge of all of the applications and weapons available to him. Without Kata you can not IMHO truly have a firm grasp on the art.

IMHO I will even go as far as to say without a true understanding of the Kata, one has no chance of mastering the art.

This may not be popular with some modern day styles/schools but I have trained with some of these instructors and IMO they are lacking to say the least. Yes they can execute a perfect front snap kick or a back hand but are missing the glue that ties all of these techniques together and gives a broad understanding how to utilize them and when.

Kata is like a book and Kihon are some of the individual sentences that make up the book. You have an understanding of what the sentence means but without reading the entire book they are pointless. Not to mention that you totally miss the other sentences such as the "hidden" techniques (Ti, Quan Fa, Torite, Tegumi and Kyusho) that are not readily apparent.

Without knowing the order of the sentences the book makes no sense. Do you have an understanding of the individual sentences? Yes. Do you fully understand the art as a whole? No you do not.

You are using the "no true Scotsman" informal fallacy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Reality is, there is many ways to have that eureka/light bulb moment and kata is one of them but...its not the only way!

With all due respect to your point of view I stand with my statement and believe it to be true. I am sure there are plenty of ways to have a eureka moment but I am talking about understanding the art that the founder created through his training and insights. I am not sure how a eureka moment makes sense in the context of my statement. Yes we as Karateka need to discover our own way but if you are not first shown the original intent you have no foundation to build from.

Again I repeat my original statement, "if you do not understand Kata which is where the entire art is derived, you do not understand the art itself. 20 eureka moments do not add up to 1000's of proven applications.

Again with all due respect I stand on my original statement based on my years of training in both traditional, Koryu and Modern day Karate styles.

If you have a valid counter point that I have not experienced please share it as I do not claim to be an expert but merely passing on what my experiences have taught me.

I may have misunderstood your point. Just to make sure we are on the same page, what your saying is, kata is about understanding the art as oppose to mastering?

What I picked up from your post is that, to master a martial arts, you have to do Katas/forms? My belief is that, mastery comes in two aspects:

1. Endless repetition of techniques/moves until it becomes automatic

2. Followed by having the proper conditioning to make the techniques more formidable.

So a boxer, judoka or a karate guy learns their art but at the end of the day , they would pick few techniques and they would drill it until it becomes second nature.

From reading Masahiko Kimura training regimen, I read that his go-to move in judo was the Osoto-gari which he would practice the movements on the trees using a rope. Or my boxing coach would throw jabs religiously all day long as a separate practice to his boxing training.

I will be honest with you, maybe my past is clouding my judgement but when I was a kid, I trained Shotokan and I remember on Friday nights, there was a very verbally abusive teacher that LOVED katas. I was not good at them and kept saying in front of the class "Are you stupid? "or he would ask if I was a slow person ( this site is very sensitive to language so I toned it down the "slow person", he used a different word which starts with R...)

Anyway, he was the only teacher that had us do Katas for most of the class and he was a big proponent of it, he was also a very unimpressive karate over all,even though he was suppose to be some kata champion. What I mean by unimpressive is, he lacked composure in sparring/kumite, lacked power, unimpressive flexibility and coordination and etc....

My disagreement is that Kata is the only or best way of understanding the art. Boxers shadow box, some judokas only do drills and randori and they develop mastery and same with various grapplers who are mostly about drills and sparring. One thing to mention, most Okinawan karatekas train in Hojo Undo and from what I have been told, they believe that Hojo Undo is the soul of Karate and every karateka should train in it.

[sensei8]

The three 'K's', Kata being one of them, by themselves are ineffective. A three legged chair is unstable because it's missing one or more of its important legs. Alas, Kata, being a tool, the tool isn't effective without the other two...Kihon and Kumite!! Concentrating on one, Kata for example, and not the other, leaves one quite unstable.

Imho!!