# Some Interesting Views On Kata



## MJS (Feb 23, 2010)

I found this article on the Kajukenbo Cafe.  Thought it was pretty interesting.  I thought we could discuss everyones views on it.  I posted it here, so as to not limit the discussion to one particular group.  So, I'm looking for feedback from everyone...Parker, Tracy, Kaju.


----------



## JWLuiza (Feb 23, 2010)

Not a Kenpo guy here, but I like some of the thoughts. A Kata should be reinforcing what you already know. I LOVE the idea of training in a live environment and then learning the Kata later as an encapsulation of what you know. I think many people are going down this thought process.

I see where some of the comments of drawing the hand back to the hip come from, but I bet if they realize that only should occur if you have something in your hand and it is helping you hit harder because you are pulling your opponent into the other hand's strike.

Looking forward to the Kenpo guys putting their .02$ in (and Kenpo girls)


----------



## K-man (Feb 23, 2010)

I hope this thread doesn't get hijacked like my recent kata thread as this is an interesting source.  The opinions posted pretty much match the sentiments expressed on MT.  There are those that see no value in kata and those like myself who see kata as the true essence of karate and essential to it's teaching. Most people are somewhere in between, probably the younger practitioners at the sceptical end and the older ones gravitating to the other.


> The katas/forms are necessary to connect us with the history of our art, and the arts that make up what we do. *As instructors, it isn't right to water-down what our students are able to offer once they become Instructors. They should teach everything to every student, as our teachers did for us, and allow their students to pick-and-choose their own personal styles.* Not every student will become a teacher. Some students need the real-world combat effective training that Kajukenbo has to offer. That's why they chose KJK instead of some other art.That is why I wait to such a late point in their training to introduce the katas. If the student is going to be a teacher, they need to know it all, understand it all, and be able to teach it all, even if they don't personally use it all!


Not being familiar with KJK I wouldn't comment as to the right time to begin training kata but, in Guju, I believe the sooner the better.  I agree wholeheartedly the the sentiment if the section I highlighted.  Without passing on the traditions of a style, within two or three generations there will be no style.



> I must admit though, most of my discoveries (light bulb moments) come bass ackwards.  I'll find that something I did worked well in a fight and when I analyze it I see it was a move right out of a form - I just didn't see it for what it was at the time I was doing the forms.  This fuels my curiosity to discover applications for other moves from the forms that seem strange or useless (looking beyond the obvious).  I find many of the light bulb moments for me come not from the individual moves themselves but applications of the transitions between the moves (where most of the "JU" lives).


 And herein lies a great truth.  When we start out we do not link the kata to *real* fighting.  Once the light bulb comes on we look for more and more applications within kata.  (It took many years to light my lightbulb!)



> The true applications of the movements in most traditional forms are no longer known and really haven't been for a few hundred years. I think that's a safe assessment of the forms in Kajukenbo as well. While some of us may understand the movements better than others, I do not believe all of the applications will ever really be known. Heck, I know some teachers who don't care what the applications are. They just want the student to do the form correctly with intensity and focus.


 Doesn't this sum up everything?  I'm just enjoying the voyage of discovery.


----------



## seasoned (Feb 24, 2010)

(I don't want to learn 1000 techniques, but teach me a few principles that I can *USE* in 1000 techniques.) And, here in lies the value of the kata of old. I give you 12 Okinawan GoJu kata, or any traditional kata, and you give me the base for 12,000 techniques. All techniques are built off of a foundation, and that foundation is KATA. Many dismiss kata in their youth, for sparring and cool moves, only to fine in their later years, the kata that was a hindrance, has become an "old friend".:asian:


----------



## seasoned (Feb 24, 2010)

JWLuiza said:


> Not a Kenpo guy here, but I like some of the thoughts. *A Kata should be reinforcing what you already know.* I LOVE the idea of training in a live environment and then learning the Kata later as an encapsulation of what you know. I think many people are going down this thought process.


This above statement is good, in my style we learn the kata first, build a strong foundation, and explored a little later down the road. I have no problem either way. 



> I see where some of the comments of drawing the hand back to the hip come from, but I bet if they realize that only should occur if you have something in your hand and it is helping you hit harder because you are pulling your opponent into the other hand's strike.


And much more. :asian:


----------



## seasoned (Feb 24, 2010)

> The true applications of the movements in most traditional forms are no longer known and really haven't been for a few hundred years. I think that's a safe assessment of the forms in Kajukenbo as well. While some of us may understand the movements better than others, I do not believe all of the applications will ever really be known. Heck, I know some teachers who don't care what the applications are. They just want the student to do the form correctly with intensity and focus. .


 



> *Doesn't this sum up everything? I'm just enjoying the voyage of discovery*.


Yes my friend, your above comment to the above statement, *IS* the true heart of this thing we do, called Traditional Martial Arts. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 :asian:


----------



## scottie (Feb 24, 2010)

Many dismiss kata in their youth, for sparring and cool moves, only to fine in their later years, the kata that was a hindrance, has become an "old friend".:asian:

So true I was a product of a McDojo for almost 10 years I was promoted to 5th Dan in this art. I began learning the busness aspect of the school about five years ago. When I had a pontental student from another in town came in for a "inturductory free private lesson" (my teacher loved for me to do them because in two years I had a 100% sell rate) and asked me what katas we taught. When I told him we don't teach that junk because it does not teach you how to fight in the real world. He looked at me and said you don't teach karate and your five stripes are a joke, then left. 

When I told my teacher that he made some comment about fighting and beating that guy up and quickly changed the subject. I told I wanted to learn katas and he said we don't teach that crap. if you want to learn the you need to go to my old teacher. 

So I did it was the best move I ever made this guy had tracable lineage and I learned more in one class than I learned in 7 years in the McDojo. 

After over 4 and a half years I have earned my first degree Black Belt. I have fallen in love with kata, and thank God every day for that guy coming into my school. Kata has taught me so much. It is awesome. O I also learned that my first teacher that wore a 7th dan had only just been promoted to brown belt when he opened his school.


----------



## MJS (Feb 24, 2010)

Well, I fall in the middle of the road on kata.  I do them, and I teach them.  We're supposed to learn from our mistakes, so when I teach someone a kata, I always give at least 1 breakdown of what the moves are.  There was a time, way back, when I first started training, that I was not shown any breakdowns.  IMO, I feel that its important for someone to at least have 1.  Some will disagree, saying the student should figure it out themselves.  Thats fine too, providing what they come up with makes sense, otherwise, they're no better off than someone who has a teacher that can't give them a breakdown either.

I feel that while we'll never fight someone like we would in a kata, we should be able to take a part from somewhere in the kata, and apply it to SD.  For example...take Parkers Short Form 2.  The opening move is stepping forward, right inward block, right outward knife hand.  Now, that move alone, I can:

1) Move forward as designed in the kata, and block a punch.

2) Move forward and use the block as a strike to the head.

3) Move back and defend against a punch.

4) Move back and defend against a choke or lapel grab.

So right there, you have 4 possible options, and I'm sure there're more.

On the flip side, I also feel that people need to do what GM Harper said in the article, and get in the ring and fight.  When I say ring, I'm not talking about the UFC, but thats an option if someone wants to, but get in and fight/spar, on a regular basis.  IMHO, there are things that sparring can do, that the kata cannot.  Again, thats just my opinion.

My current Kenpo teacher and well as one of my Arnis teachers, are not mega fans of kata.  Yes, they teach them, yes, they give applications behind them, but they also put alot of focus on the fighting as well.


----------



## shaolinmonkmark (Feb 24, 2010)

i always try to imagine the bunkai, and any hidden moves within them, like, why did i turn my foot , and shift my weight this way? Could  it be i am sweeping a potential attacker's leg?
Think kata starts us all on a path, and, keeps us enlightend and also always learning as we continue to practice them.


----------



## K-man (Feb 24, 2010)

MJS said:


> I feel that while we'll never fight someone like we would in a kata, we should be able to take a part from somewhere in the kata, and apply it to SD.
> 
> On the flip side, I also feel that people need to do what GM Harper said in the article, and get in the ring and fight.  When I say ring, I'm not talking about the UFC, but thats an option if someone wants to, but get in and fight/spar, on a regular basis.  IMHO, there are things that sparring can do, that the kata cannot.  Again, thats just my opinion.


Until recently I had never seen kata performed other than as *Kihon* Kata.  This is the basic form you see performed in competitions, demonstrations and in all gradings, and demonstrates stance, strength, focus and basic techniques. Regardless of the complexity kihon kata is the basic level and as you rightly point out we would never fight like that. From there it speeds up, the movements change slightly because of the increased speed and the kata becomes martial and very effective.
Sure within the kata are the different applications we can extract and train, but the kata itself can be used in its entirety if we are taught how. Personally, I doubt I will become that proficient but I am certainly trying to reach a new level. At that level performing the kata, with a partner, *is* sparring.
Another thing we need to take account of is that karate, kung fu etc. were not developed to fight other martial artists.  It was to offer the practitioner a means of defence against untrained assailants, within their community, not competition.  Unless you are into the sports side of things, you are not really learning to fight other martial artists. If you want to do that, that's fine but you're better off looking at MMA, MT, boxing etc and forgetting the kata. (TKD is a different animal because it is primarily focussed on sport.)  My feeling is that even the sparring we do is counter productive because we spar as one martial artist against another.  
In aikido we don't spar as such and often derogatory comments are made about the wussy attacks (mostly justified). However, to test the aikido we need a reality based full on attack as you might expect to encounter on the street, not another fully trained martial artist looking for an opening to attack. IMO that is why it is pretty pointless trying to compare the different MAs as to which one is better than the other.  I believe that all MAs should give us a reasonable measure of protection and peace of mind as we go about our daily routines. Within any style there will always be someone who can beat someone else, from another style, in a competition.  That doesn't make one style better than another, it just makes one martial artist better than another.  :asian:


----------



## LawDog (Feb 24, 2010)

A Kata is made up of multiple "one vs one" techniques that are connected together by transitional techniques. These transitional techniques / moves change the "one vs one" into a "one vs multiple" opponent situation. 
With this in mind it is my opinon that a student should first learn basic "one vs one" techniques. After developing a basic understanding of the "one vs one" a student should then be taught transition footwork / techniques. After this a complete Kata can be properly taught and understood.
For a beginner it is difficult enough to understand and execute a "one vs one" technique never mind a "multiple" situation.
Just my point of view, no hijack intended.


----------



## JWLuiza (Feb 24, 2010)

I find it unlikely that Kata are meant to be a way to train against multiple attackers, since a 2 on 1 is not the same as 1 on 1 and then another 1 on 1. But I'm not sure if that is your point or not....


----------



## seasoned (Feb 25, 2010)

JWLuiza said:


> I find it unlikely that Kata are meant to be a way to train against multiple attackers, since a 2 on 1 is not the same as 1 on 1 and then another 1 on 1. But I'm not sure if that is your point or not....


Interpretations differ from one style or art to another. In Okinawan GoJu many of the 90 degree turns are actually throws as opposed to facing another opponent. Also some of the 45 degree turns are used for unbalancing or uprooting an opponent. Just some thoughts. :asian:


----------



## LawDog (Feb 25, 2010)

Kata teaches you how to turn so as to align properly towards another opponent. It also helps you to develope the floor clock and your personal clock.
To train for a multiple attack you need to train against live multiple attackers.
Except for their minor tacticle transitional applications, 1 vs 1 is the same as 1 vs 3.
Transitional - this is not restricted to footwork only.


----------



## seasoned (Feb 25, 2010)

MJS said:


> Well, I fall in the middle of the road on kata. I do them, and I teach them. We're supposed to learn from our mistakes, so when I teach someone a kata, I always give at least 1 breakdown of what the moves are. There was a time, way back, when I first started training, that I was not shown any breakdowns. IMO, I feel that its important for someone to at least have 1. Some will disagree, saying the student should figure it out themselves. Thats fine too, providing what they come up with makes sense, otherwise, they're no better off than someone who has a teacher that can't give them a breakdown either.


 There has been a love/hate relationship in regards to kata forever. I feel once kata are understood, they can be practiced with a whole new outlook. I will speak for my art specifically. Sparring, which is used sparingly in Okinawan GoJu, is generally done in three ways, (1) stop and start when a "killing blow" (tongue in cheek), has been determined, (2) continuous movement with light contact, (3) gloves on, with foot pads, and heavy contact. The above (3) are a progression. If we try to fit kata into this progression we find it hard to do, and so it is dismissed as somewhat useless. Now, kata, is not a progression, but is made up of many finishing techniques grouped together. These finishing techiques within kata involve a first contact with a grab/strike, slam down, finish. Kata were not designed to look fluid and flowery, just to get the job done. Self defense/ martial arts, in it's inception was never meant to spend a lot of time with one opponent as in sparring, but in the case of one or more, to move swiftly and violently, as in KATA. No one is asking us to love kata, but to see it for it's worth, and to get a glimse of what it was intended for. With this mindset established, now, grab a partener, put some protective gear on, and start dissecting those kata, for the real deal. IMHO :asian:


----------



## K-man (Feb 26, 2010)

LawDog said:


> Kata teaches you how to turn so as to align properly towards another opponent. It also helps you to develope the floor clock and your personal clock.
> To train for a multiple attack you need to train against live multiple attackers.
> Except for their minor tacticle transitional applications, 1 vs 1 is the same as 1 vs 3.
> Transitional - this is not restricted to footwork only.


Don't know anything about Kenpo so wouldn't comment on multiple attackers within that style.  IMO it is not the case on Okinawan Goju.  We look for one attacker and the various turns denote angle of attack, takedowns and in some instances moving behind your opponent.  I'm with JWL and Seasoned in this one.  There is nothing to say that one attacker could not be replaced with another but I don't believe any of our kata provide for multiple attackers attacking at the same time.  :asian:


----------



## TimoS (Feb 26, 2010)

K-man said:


> Don't know anything about Kenpo so wouldn't comment on multiple attackers within that style.  IMO it is not the case on Okinawan Goju.  We look for one attacker and the various turns denote angle of attack, takedowns and in some instances moving behind your opponent.  I'm with JWL and Seasoned in this one.  There is nothing to say that one attacker could not be replaced with another but I don't believe any of our kata provide for multiple attackers attacking at the same time.  :asian:


Pretty much the same with us, as I've come to understand it. The way I understand the turns and doing the same techniques again from different side is that we're mainly taught the same "scenario" but against someone attacking e.g. with a left instead of a right. Mind you, I'm not quite sure why we, in some kata at least, repeat the technique for a third time.


----------



## seasoned (Feb 26, 2010)

TimoS said:


> Pretty much the same with us, as I've come to understand it. The way I understand the turns and doing the same techniques again from different side is that we're mainly taught the same "scenario" but against someone attacking e.g. with a left instead of a right. Mind you, I'm not quite sure why we, in some kata at least, repeat the technique for a third time.


What follows the third time is the ending of the technique not shown in the first two times. Right, left, right/finish. IMHO :asian:


----------



## Shifu Steve (Mar 26, 2010)

seasoned said:


> I feel once kata are understood, they can be practiced with a whole new outlook.


 
Agreed.  I've posted before that in previous efforts to recruit students I found there to be a general reluctance to learn kata.  I myself shared that reluctance but was lucky enough to have a teacher that taught and explained seamlessly.  Once I understood that the kata was a physical manifestation of a series of concepts that were the root of technique, things began to fall into perspective.  I can't say how long it took me to come to that realization but there was definitely an element of trust involved.  Trust for the teacher in the sense that the kata was worthwhile to learn.  Of course the application of specific examples of technique went a long way toward solidifying that point.  However as Seasoned wrote earlier, it can take a significant part of the martial arts journey to reach the point where you see its true value.  I currently actively run 3 forms.  I find so much technique in those 3 that I am totally satisfied with the practical applications of those concepts, for now at least.  I run the rest of my forms for maintenance in the case that I need to go back to the reference for some new ideas.  I also run them out of respect for being taught in the first place and for tradition.   Trying to communicate what kata are for is easy in lipservice but I find it's something that really has to be experienced by the martial artist.  Some information is revealed through work and time.


----------



## kungfu penguin (Apr 4, 2010)

ive always been told that the essence, and in some cases the secrets of the art are hidden in kata  once you learn those katas and understand them ,  if you practice said katas  you will never lose or forget the essence of the art--tom


----------



## rune katana (Apr 7, 2010)

My perspective is more of a beginner's one, as I've been training in Kajukenbo for about a year.  I was taught a kata (pinan) right away, and found it useful for many reasons.  It helped me practice basic movements and attacks and also how to transition from stance to stance and from block/attack to block/attack.  Plus, it was something that gave a way to measure improvement, and also something to practice at home without a sparring partner.

I don't see a reason why these should be withheld from beginner students.  Even if all they take away from them is are the fundamentals of the strikes and blocks, it's still helped them learn those.  If they get more from it by practicing them and pushing themselves and drawing more applications from them, even better.  

I feel they can only enhance.  

I had a funny experience that was also a lightbulb.  We always line up and face in the same direction on the mat when we're doing our forms.  One night our instructor had us turn 180 and begin them from there.  That was a wakeup call on how much your brain trains from repetition.  I was laughing because it was difficult, just from a simple orientation change.  That was a great moment.


----------



## Danjo (Apr 16, 2010)

To me it's all about the basics. Kata teaches and reinforces the basics. Basics blocks, stances, kicks, punches, transitional movements etc. Since all advanced stuff is built on the basics foundation, I find kata very valuable as a training tool. For this reason alone we should keep them.

If others find more in them that that (secret bunkai; chi power etc.): cool. I've given up trying to tell people what is useful to them or not. Like Hamlet said, "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." And we can all end up surprised.


----------



## 5rings (Apr 21, 2010)

seasoned said:


> This above statement is good, in my style we learn the kata first, build a strong foundation, and explored a little later down the road. I have no problem either way.
> 
> 
> And much more. :asian:


 
_Yes ALL TRUE_...Kata in both modern or traditional styles has a vital place, It allows us to refine the smallest details of our stance & posture....and build Grounding & Rooting.... Chi energy..... much needed mindset!


----------



## 5rings (Apr 21, 2010)

Shifu Steve said:


> Agreed. I've posted before that in previous efforts to recruit students I found there to be a general reluctance to learn kata. I myself shared that reluctance but was lucky enough to have a teacher that taught and explained seamlessly. Once I understood that the kata was a physical manifestation of a series of concepts that were the root of technique, things began to fall into perspective. I can't say how long it took me to come to that realization but there was definitely an element of trust involved. Trust for the teacher in the sense that the kata was worthwhile to learn. Of course the application of specific examples of technique went a long way toward solidifying that point. However as Seasoned wrote earlier, it can take a significant part of the martial arts journey to reach the point where you see its true value. I currently actively run 3 forms. I find so much technique in those 3 that I am totally satisfied with the practical applications of those concepts, for now at least. I run the rest of my forms for maintenance in the case that I need to go back to the reference for some new ideas. I also run them out of respect for being taught in the first place and for tradition. Trying to communicate what kata are for is easy in lipservice but I find it's something that really has to be experienced by the martial artist. Some information is revealed through work and time.


 Great explanation of the message...all true the experience is everythng and is personal from student to student as is the kata it's self!


----------



## Sigung86 (May 6, 2010)

Having been in multiple arts over the past 46 years or so, I have the "standard" view of forms.  They teach much and reinforce much in the way of basics and hidden or secret moves.  However, I also like to think in terms of individual development with them.  

In kata/forms you are really only limited by your own imagination and basic knowledge.  You can, in all likelihood, with a bit of thinking and visualizing, come up with many different variations on a theme for virtually any move in the kata.

It's interesting to me that so many of the Okinawan, Japanese, and Korean systems use virtually the same kata/sets/forms.  And often enough, the interpretations aren't that much different... Or at least they weren't when I was in my traveling and inquisitive youth days.

Regardless of your feelings toward these little gremlins or divine enlighteners, the basics are all there and once you have those down, and with some understanding, then the sky is the limit when it comes to interpretation and performance.


----------



## shaolin-warrior (Jun 24, 2010)

At every belt level we introduce a new form; these forms in completion seem to be little more than a pre-arranged series of blocks, punches and kicks. This is so far from the truth. The key to maximizing your training is hidden in your form sets. They teach us focus and balance, proper body mechanics and complete range of motion, efficiency in target selection and destruction, proper breathing as well as centering and stance training. Dynamic tension will strengthen your core as your body becomes resilient to being hit or kicked. Most importantly your speed and accuracy with your Kempos and combinations will increase to your maximum ability.
Forms are lonely, no partner, no instructor, just you and your martial arts. Perfecting what you know and developing your own martial philosophy on your techniques. Just one mans opinion.http://kempoinfo.com/shaolin-kempo-...in-kempo-karate/the-black-belt-forms/honsuki/


----------



## Flying Crane (Jun 24, 2010)

My impression is that many people believe the application and bunkai of the kata is the most important aspect.  People are often looking for the right-now, how do I use this stuff, side of the kata.

I agree, that is important.

But I feel what is more important, in a well-designed, and well understood kata, is that what are being built are the foundational skills and the principles that the method is built upon.  The specific use and application of the various movements is of secondary importance in comparison.

The foundational skills and principles are what drive the entire system, and the kata is a method of learning to apply those skills under all circumstances.

The actual choreography of the kata is of least importance.  As one of my teachers says, the form itself is not important.  What is important is every single movement within the form, that it be done correctly.

What he means is that the proper foundation and principles are being used to drive every technique, no matter what that technique is.


----------



## madeku (Jun 25, 2010)

well, my thoughts on Kata are a little different than most. i see value in doing them as obviously excellent solo training, learning to change direction, and switch from one technique to the next, generally in a multiple attacker situation. being able to practice the set timing of the technique, as well as being able to move with full force without having to worry about the safety of your uke..

i do however not understand the argument of "it teaches you this.." "because of this part, i can do a, b, c. etc" I do know in American Kenpo that the forms generally contain the self defense techniques, and other Kenpo systems, as well as traditional karate and all may not have such emphasis on them, and thus need more kata to extrapolate self defense ideas out of.

the reason being, you should already know the things in the kata already with the techniques. how to step back and block, how to step forward and block, how to block and strike simultaneously, how and when to shift stance. etc. those types of things are already in the techniques.

when people say secret, or hidden moves, they are present in techniques as well. please note i've only been in one kenpo system, and the forms are composed of the self defense techniques. rather than some styles are self defense techniques made from the kata as traditional systems are, and some of the more original kenpo styles to my knowledge.. so i think that has a major influence on my view. and for the record i do like learning and doing kata, and i love sets (which are basically mini katas designed specifically to practice basics)


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jun 25, 2010)

seasoned said:


> (I don't want to learn 1000 techniques, but teach me a few principles that I can *USE* in 1000 techniques.) And, here in lies the value of the kata of old. I give you 12 Okinawan GoJu kata, or any traditional kata, and you give me the base for 12,000 techniques. All techniques are built off of a foundation, and that foundation is KATA. Many dismiss kata in their youth, for sparring and cool moves, only to fine in their later years, the kata that was a hindrance, has become an "old friend".:asian:



QFT.  100% agreement.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jun 25, 2010)

madeku said:


> well, my thoughts on Kata are a little different than most. i see value in doing them as obviously excellent solo training, learning to change direction, and switch from one technique to the next, generally in a multiple attacker situation. being able to practice the set timing of the technique, as well as being able to move with full force without having to worry about the safety of your uke..
> 
> i do however not understand the argument of "it teaches you this.." "because of this part, i can do a, b, c. etc" I do know in American Kenpo that the forms generally contain the self defense techniques, and other Kenpo systems, as well as traditional karate and all may not have such emphasis on them, and thus need more kata to extrapolate self defense ideas out of.
> 
> ...



Because there is bunkai in the kata.  There is no bunkai in the basic exercises.  A kick is a kick, a block is a block.  In the kata, one may see a dozen different applications to a set of kicks, blocks, punches, and so on, and that is bunkai.  There is no secret, but bunkai often has to be demonstrated and explained by someone who has had it demonstrated and explained to them, and this is what makes people think it is hidden or secret.  Because it's not self-evident.  I can practice a front snap kick 10,000 times and learn how to do it correctly, with speed and power.  Only a certain kata shows me that this preciese kick can also be a brush-block (for example).  I would never have thought of that.  And even in the kata, I might not have found it on my own, but in the sequence taught, once revealed by my sensei, it seems natural, understandable, and now I can see how it can be used in lots of applications outside the kata.  Duh.  Well, for me, that's part of the absolute value of kata.  And I'm just a blue belt in Isshin-Ryu, only been doing this for about two years now.


----------



## DavidCC (Jun 25, 2010)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Because there is bunkai in the kata.  There is no bunkai in the basic exercises.  A kick is a kick, a block is a block.  In the kata, one may see a dozen different applications to a set of kicks, blocks, punches, and so on, and that is bunkai.  There is no secret, but bunkai often has to be demonstrated and explained by someone who has had it demonstrated and explained to them, and this is what makes people think it is hidden or secret.  Because it's not self-evident.  I can practice a front snap kick 10,000 times and learn how to do it correctly, with speed and power.  Only a certain kata shows me that this preciese kick can also be a brush-block (for example).  I would never have thought of that.  And even in the kata, I might not have found it on my own, but in the sequence taught, once revealed by my sensei, it seems natural, understandable, and now I can see how it can be used in lots of applications outside the kata.  Duh.  Well, for me, that's part of the absolute value of kata.  And I'm just a blue belt in Isshin-Ryu, only been doing this for about two years now.




Yes, but, there are things referenced in some teachers' kata that are not explicit.  For example I was training with a very exprienced guy and we were reviewing a video of Sensei Oyata of Kansas City.  he showed the movement from the form, then he showed an application of that movement on a person.  The guy I was training with then shows me how another technique is in the same form (not the exact same moment) but one of the movements was the reverse and the whole sequence was in reverse order.  He had been shown this by Sen. Oyata years before.  And this technique was one that could kill a person.  So the guideline he told me was that the more dangerous moves were still contained in the forms, but they were not literally done - they were hidden within the movements.

In American Kenpo, the forms are constructed from the techniques and I would think that this kind of thing is not going on in those forms.  Of course any motion can have many applications but that is not the same as the hidden applications of okinawan kempo forms.


----------



## TimoS (Jun 25, 2010)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Because it's not self-evident


Exactly, although many times when an application to a kata sequence has been shown to me I really feel like Homer Simpson and just want to cry out "D'oh!"


----------



## Danjo (Jun 25, 2010)

I think that much confusion comes from not understanding the history of the martial arts and kata in particular. The martial arts were outlawed on Okinawa for many years and were preserved primarily through kata. Public performances of kata were seen during this time disguised as "folk dancing". The "hidden meaning" was literally that: hidden in the form of a dance from the eyes of the oppressive government. On the surface, it was just a dance, in reality it was a fighting system. As a result, certain moves were actually altered to a less martial movement so that it's meaning wouldn't be obvious to outsiders, hence "Bunkai" understanding was needed to explain what these moves really meant.

When Karate (and Kung Fu) students began training, they were taught kata _first_. Basics or "Kihon" weren't taught seperately for the most part except for makiwara training etc. until the katas were well learned. After the katas were learned well enough, and the student had proven his loyalty to the teacher, then the movements within the kata were explained and drilled in a more realistic fasion. They were extracted from the kata much like information is extracted from a ZIP drive. The meaning of the movement would vary from teacher to teacher depending on what he was taught and his own experience (or lack thereof).

The idea of isolating the movements into basics and teaching them first outside of kata is a modern approach. The Okinawans and Chinese would have viewed that as puting the cart before the horse.

Now, there are some that put forth the notion that there are even further "hidden secrets" in kata that release some kind of chi energy and enable one to perform "no touch knockouts" etc. I personally don't buy into that since the historic explanation seems to answer the whole thing well enough.


----------



## TimoS (Jun 26, 2010)

Danjo said:


> When Karate (and Kung Fu) students began training, they were taught kata _first_. Basics or "Kihon" weren't taught seperately for the most part except for makiwara training etc. until the katas were well learned. After the katas were learned well enough, and the student had proven his loyalty to the teacher, then the movements within the kata were explained and drilled in a more realistic fasion.


From what I've been told, that is not the case. The practising of a whole kata was in a minor role. The old way of teaching was to teach a move in kata and then show some application to it. Then the student would drill those, until the teacher would show the next move and the application to it.


> The idea of isolating the movements into basics and teaching them first outside of kata is a modern approach. The Okinawans and Chinese would have viewed that as puting the cart before the horse.


I kind of agree here, although it was in Okinawa, probably some time at the beginning of the 20th century that the practise of kihon as a "separate" exercise was started. It is likely that not all teachers took to this practise immediately, but at least those who taught at schools and therefore had a large number of people practising at the same time "had" to adopt this method.


> Now, there are some that put forth the notion that there are even further "hidden secrets" in kata that release some kind of chi energy and enable one to perform "no touch knockouts" etc. I personally don't buy into that since the historic explanation seems to answer the whole thing well enough.


Exactly.


----------



## Flying Crane (Jun 26, 2010)

Danjo said:


> When Karate (and Kung Fu) students began training, they were taught kata _first_. Basics or "Kihon" weren't taught seperately for the most part except for makiwara training etc. until the katas were well learned.
> 
> The idea of isolating the movements into basics and teaching them first outside of kata is a modern approach. The Okinawans and Chinese would have viewed that as puting the cart before the horse.



Hey Danjo,

I'd be curious to know your resource for these comments.  These ideas just seem really counter-intuitive for several reasons.

My own experiences with the Chinese arts indicate they have very specific methods of delivering their punches and kicks, i.e. "basics".  I think it's very difficult to teach and develop those basics without isolating them first.  If you learn them in the context of a kata first, without developing them on their own, then I think they often go undeveloped.  The correct way of delivering these strikes and techniques won't be properly developed.  Isolation first is the best way to do that.  I find it hard to believe that the ancients wouldn't have understood that.

Also, if you consider that someone, somewhere, at some time, created these kata, they were working with a body of techniques and methods that they synthesized into the kata.  They had to start with something, and I'd suspect that "something" was a thorough understanding of the basics.  The process of creating the kata would certainly hammer into their understanding that it's important to teach the basics first, before teaching the kata.

I do believe that kata was/is often taught before learning application and fighting.  Kata is often the body of knowledge that the system utilizes.  Learning that body of knowledge comes first, learning how to USE it would come later.  But I think that before learning the kata, drilling and developing the basics would have been the very first step so that when the kata is learned, it is built upon a solid foundation of good basics.

We hear tales of old kung fu schools where the new student would simply practice horse stance for six months or a year, before learning anything else.  Whether or not this was historically accurate I don't know, but this idea was to build the foundation (basics) before moving on.  I think it's safe to say that learning the basic striking, blocking, stepping, etc. methods would come next, before putting it together into the kata.  The only way you can develop any level of skill at all with the kata is if you first understand the foundation and basics.  Otherwise, all of your kata practice is a hollow dance, without meaning and without proper foundation and delivery.  I find it hard to accept that the ancients would not have known this.  

If you look at different lineages of a single Chinese system, you usually find more similarities than differences in how they do things.  The differences are usually cosmetic and superficial.  The foundation and principles are the same.  This indicates to me that there is a commonly understood thread that  winds thru all the lineages and makes the system recognizable for what it is.  I'd say that it's because the basics are thoroughly understood and the system has been passed down thru the generations with this paramount.

I will also say that I think there are, and always have been, poor instructors and good instructors.  On an individual level, a poor instructor might skip over the development of basics and teach kata first.  I'd say his students will suffer for it.  A good instructor will understand the importance of teaching and drilling basics before teaching kata.  I am sure that there were both kinds of teachers in the past, so while certain statements may be true in some cases, they might not hold water in others.

these are my thoughts, anyway.


----------



## Danjo (Jun 27, 2010)

Flying Crane said:


> Hey Danjo,
> 
> I'd be curious to know your resource for these comments. These ideas just seem really counter-intuitive for several reasons.
> 
> ...


 
Yeah I should have re-read what I said a bit more carefully and been clearer. I wasn't so much talking about teaching someone how to throw a punch or kick etc., but rather driling them in isolation and how to apply those things in a fight. In Funakoshi's book "Karate Do My Way of Life" in the first chapter he tells of learning nothing but kata and practicing it endlessly recounting his own training. In one of his other books "Karate Jutsu" he also goes into "Basic training" which is all kata. In those books he also tells of the Okinawan folk dances being disguised fighting forms etc.

To my understanding from the various readings of old time training, the basics were drilled on a makiwara and done in kata. The lines of students marching up and down the mat doing punches and kicks etc. wasn't used as a training method until Karate started being taught in PE classes to large groups of students.

I'm sure you're correct that certain basics are taught first in various Chinese arts, like you mention with the horse stance etc., however, Tai Chi seems to jump right into the forms as does Hsing-I and Bagua even in modern times when I was taught them. The forms are very simple at first, then they are then linked into longer more complex forms.


----------

